EAST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE SOUTH GATE EDUCATIONAL …€¦ · east los angeles college south gate educational center master plan 2015 april 16, 2013

EAST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE SOUTH GATE EDUCATIONAL CENTER MASTER PLAN 2015

April 16, 2013

Project team / contents

April 16, 2013 SOUTH GATE EDUCATIONAL CENTER MASTER PLAN 1

Project team contents

CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE

CPT/ELAC East Los Angeles College

CONSULTANTS

Structural John A. Martin & Associates

Historical SWCA

Project Team

SOUTH GATE EDUCATIONAL CENTER Introduction

1 A SEPARATE APPENDIX DOCUMENT CONTAINS FURTHER DETAILED REPORTS:

2

1200 West Floral Drive Monterey Park, CA 91754

Maria Teresa Carvajal Cell: (323) 434-0244 Fax: (323) 859-2342 [email protected]

ARCHITECT

Berliner and Associates Architecture 5976 Washington Blvd. Culver City, CA 90232 Tel: (310) 838-2100 Fax: (310) 838-2150

Richard Berliner, Principal in Charge [email protected]

Michael Kreski, Project Designer [email protected]

Mike Frey, Project Architect [email protected]

Robert Russo, Project Designer [email protected]

25129 The Old Road, Suite 316 Stevenson Ranch, CA 91381 Tel: (661) 260-2646 Fax: (661) 260-2649 Chuck Whitaker, Principal [email protected]

MEP GLUMAC 617 W. 7th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90017-3830 Tel: (213) 239-8866 Fax: (213) 239-8816 Edwin Lee, P.E., Managing Principal [email protected]

Civil KPFF 6080 Center Drive, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Tel: (310) 665-2800 Fax: (310) 665-9075 Tricia Johns, P.E.,Principal [email protected] Shahrzad Bigonah, P.E. [email protected]

625 Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 190 South Pasadena, CA 91030 Tel: (626) 240-0587 Fax: (626) 240-0607 Shannon Carmack, Architectural Historian [email protected]

Traffic Linscott Law & Greenspan, Engineers 600 South Lake Avenue, Suite 500 Pasadena, CA 91106 Tel: (626) 796-2322 Fax: (626) 792-0941 Clare M. Look-Jaeger, P.E., Principal [email protected] Alfred C. Ying, P.G, P.T.P. [email protected]

LEED Antea Group 3229 E. Spring Street, Suite 201 Long Beach, CA 90806 Tel: (562) 206-2531 Amber Keenoy, LEED AP BD+C, Sr. Consultant [email protected]

Program

PROJECT SITE Location Neighborhood Character Historical Aspects Existing Building Use

SGEC MASTER PLAN General Overview Key Concepts Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation Landscape and Open Space Campus Character I SGEC Building and Parking Structure Sustainability Strategies

APPENDIX Consultant Narratives

3

5 6 8 9

10 11-12

13 14 15 16 17

18

Executive Summary Civil Report MEP Strategies Structural Analysis Historical Report Traffic Analysis LEED Strategies & Scorecards

A 02 A 03-10 A 11-17 A 18-19 A 20-21

A 22 A 21-44


Firestone educational center: introduction

The South Gate Educational Center (SGEC) is a project of East Los Angeles College (ELAC). It will create a new satellite campus to serve the increasing needs of a growing student population in the southern portion of the college’s service district.

The SGEC is warranted by student demand and the impending lease expiration of ELAC’s existing satellite campus. ELAC’s existing satellite, the South Gate Educational Center (SGEC), operates in a leased building a short distance from the SGEC site. The SGEC is operating at full capacity and is unable to accommodate growth, even though student demand is increasing. Moreover, its lease is soon to expire and cannot be renewed. Without the SGEC, ELAC will find itself within a few years unable to serve the needs of students in the area.

The South Gate site was originally purchased by the Los Angeles Community College District because it offered a large parcel of underutilized land for a new campus, unobtainable elsewhere in the area, with landmark industrial buildings that potentially could become educational facilities. Since this initial purchase, plans for the SGEC have gone through many iterations in response to changing thinking about project scope, adaptive re-use of existing buildings, academic program, student population, and budget considerations. The current master plan is the culmination of a long and thoughtful process.

The 2015 SGEC Master Plan offers a realistic vision to achieve the college’s educational goals and revitalize a pivotal site in the City of South Gate.

Aerial view of the project site. LACCD Property: 18.5 acres

SGEC Project Site: 18.1 acres (approx.) Joint

use driveway improvement

Existing ELAC South Gate Educational Center


Firestone educational center: Program

The goal of the SGEC Master Plan is to create an educational facility offering ELAC students a comprehensive academic program beyond anything available in the area today.

The SGEC is intended to serve the needs of a student population projected initially at 5,000 in 2019, growing to 9,000 by 2031.

This initial population is greater than the capacity of the existing South Gate Educational Center, which handled 4,912 students in Fall, 2011 and has no capability for growth. The SGEC will accommodate the anticipated increase in students, achieving 183% of the SGEC’s capacity by 2031.

A priority of the SGEC program is to allow students to complete their degree and transfer requirements in this one convenient location.

The SGEC will offer academic programs parallel to those available at the main ELAC campus, together with equitable student and academic support services.

A deficiency of the SGEC is it has no facilities for lab sciences which are requisite for degree and transfer, and so students must commute to the main ELAC campus to use labs there. The SGEC building will provide the needed science labs and will also expand the space available for the expanding CTE and LAS programs. The total number of classrooms will increase from 17 at the SGEC to 32 at the SGEC.

The new SGEC building will contain all necessary classrooms, labs, offices and support facilities for the new satellite campus.

The program for the building has been developed through intensive interaction with ELAC faculty and staff, balancing ideal wishes for more space against what can realistically be afforded, staffed, and maintained. The resulting program sizes instructional space to accommodate a reasonable level of growth and focuses on spaces that serve multiple uses and reduce redundancy.

A breakdown of the building program is illustrated below. It totals approximately 69,980 assignable square feet (ASF), which translates to a total building size of approximately 102,911 gross square feet (GSF) after factoring in circulation, restrooms, service and other functional requirements.

Previous programs for the SGEC anticipated a larger project with a final population of 12,000 students. Why the change?

The Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) has become increasingly aware of the need to justify growth and expenditures, with a concern about “over- building” and a renewed focus on analyzing capacity load ratios to ensure new projects are appropriate in concept, scale, and budget. The SGEC project has been re-sized in response to these concerns.

The 12,000-student population previously projected for the SGEC anticipated a two-phase project that would ultimately adapt an existing industrial building for academic use. The current plan is instead a single-phase project wherein this industrial building and others on the site will remain in their non-SGEC functions.

Whereas the previous Master Plan proposed demolition of two buildings to make room for the new campus, the current plan demolishes three buildings and uses more of the site, while still providing ample outdoor space for landscaping and activities to serve the SGEC. The SEGC has no outdoor space at all.

The proposed sizes of the SGEC building and parking lot have also been reduced, in proportion to the lower population projection.

Academic Group 46,501 ASSIGNABLE SQUARE FEET (ASF)

Administrative Group 14,522 ASF

Shared Facilities Group 8,957 ASF

Non-Program Spaces 32,888 SF

NOTE: All square footages shown are approximate

Academic Support Center Shared study room, computer

Science Cluster Shared science classrooms, labs, stockroom, offices, etc.

Arts Cluster Music and Art classrooms, Mac classroom, large lecture hall, etc.

CTE Cluster AJ classroom, CFES classroom and lab, Arch./Engineering classroom, collaborative and computer lecture rooms,

Shared Classrooms 21 lecture classrooms, 4 flexible classrooms

Psychology, Philosophy, Phys.Ed. Men’s / Women’s Health, Math, English,

Student Services Admissions, counseling, first aid, DSPS, EOPS, CalWORKS,

Administration Fiscal, payroll, Dean’s office, offices, conference rooms, data center, workroom, faculty/

Student Lounge

Health Center

Non-Program Spaces Necessary non-program functions such as lobby and circulation space, restrooms, maintenance and storage facilities, mechanical rooms, etc.

Building Efficiency LACCD evaluates building efficiency by percentages, and has targeted 68% as the efficiency for the SGEC Building. This means the total building is to be at least 68% assignable space, with 32% non-program space at most.

classroom and lab, tutoring area, workshop room, etc.

Phys.Ed. Exercise room, showers, changing area, etc.

computer lab, lecture classroom, flexible classroom, etc.

Chicano Studies, Foreign Language, Speech & Theatre Arts (with Arts Cluster)

matriculation, etc. staff lounge, repo and mail room, etc.

Library

Bookstore Efficiency Factor: 68%

Total Building Size:

100%

Assignable Square Feet: 69,980

= Gross Square Feet: 102,911

69,980 ASSIGNABLE SQUARE FEET (ASF) 102,911 GROSS SQUARE FEET (GSF)


Project site: location

Firestone Educational Center (SGEC)

East Los Angeles College (ELAC)

The site for the proposed South Gate Educational Center is located in the City of South Gate, approximately 7 miles from the main East Los Angeles College campus in Monterey Park.

Formerly a Firestone Tire manufacturing and warehousing complex, the site is now owned by the Los Angeles Community College District. It is bounded by Firestone Boulevard on the south, Santa Fe Avenue on the east, Southern Pacific Railroad’s right-of-way on the north, and currently-unoccupied industrial property on the west.

South Gate Educational Center, a satellite campus of ELAC, operates nearby today in a building south of Firestone Boulevard. Commuting from here to the main ELAC campus takes approximately 18 minutes.

The SGEC site is well located for its intended students, who are drawn from the southern portion of the college’s service district. This area includes Bell, Bell Gardens, Commerce, Cudahy, Huntington Park, Maywood, South Gate and Vernon.

The site is also midway between the Harbor and Long Beach Freeways on Firestone Boule- vard, an accessibility advantage for commuting students and faculty.

Pomona Freeway (60)

Staples Center

East Los Angeles College (ELAC) USC

Santa Monica Freeway (10)

Harbor Freeway (110)

7 miles (approx.)

Manchester Avenue

Existing South Gate Educational Center

Downtown Los Angeles

Long Beach Freeway (710)

Santa Ana Freeway (5)

East LosAngeles

City ofCommerce

Vernon

Santa Fe Avenue

Alameda Street

Commute time alongthis route: 18 minutes

(approx.) Maywood

Huntington Park

BellFlorence- Graham

Los Angeles Walnut

Park Bell

GardensProposed South Gate

Cudahy

Firestone Boulevard

Watts South Gate


E

1

Project site: Features and conditions

The site offers ELAC a large, contiguous parcel of land for its new satellite campus. The SGEC will use only a portion of the property owned here by LACCD.

The site is zoned by the City of South Gate as being in an M-3 Heavy Manufacturing Zone. The Firestone Tire Company vacated the property in 1980, and its main use today is for warehousing in Buildings 1, 3 and 4, and offices in Building 2. The buildings are partially occupied, not full to capacity.

The site is almost totally flat, with barely any landscaping. Although LACCD owns 18.5 acres, the SGEC will use about 18.1 acres (area outlined in orange). The rest of the site will remain in its present use.

The property west of the SGEC site, known as the HON site for a former tenant, is currently unused. Its future development is uncertain.

Building Data

Building 1 Warehouse Ground floor 259,696 SF Second floor 55,939 SF Basement 140,314 SF

455,949 SF

Building 2 Offices 2 Stories total 16,287 SF Basement 8,800 SF

25,087 SF

Building 3 Warehouse 4 Stories total 296,358 SF Basement 70,013 SF

366,371 SF

Building 4 Warehouse 2 Stories 220,550 SF

Grand Total: 1,067,957 SF

Existing ELAC South Gate Educational Center Classroom/office building -- leased property

Land: 4.2 acres 1 Building: 51,000 SF

Student population (Fall 2011): 4,912

Access: Streets and Transit

Firestone Boulevard is the major access to the site today. Santa Fe Avenue has significant traffic but no access to the SGEC site. There is bus service along Firestone with connection to light rail. South Gate’s General Plan 2035 classifies Firestone as a Primary Arterial and Primary Transit Street, and Santa Fe as a Collector street.

Existing signalized street intersections

Bus Lines 315 and 115 on Firestone Boulevard

Bus Line 215 on Santa Fe / Firestone

One mile to Metro Blue Line light rail station

Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way - infrequently used, freight only

Other Notes:

The only vehicular entry to SGEC site today is the driveway off Firestone.

The SGEC property line bisects the driveway. Improvements must be kept on SGEC property.

“Cul-de-sac” on civil engineering plans is a City utility easement that must be respected.

Building Restriction Areas dedicated to the City can be removed by consent of the City Council.

The Building 2 corner is separated from the rest of the site; there is no vehicular through-traffic.

The City of South Gate 2035 General Plan calls for widening of Firestone Boulevard.

Existing buildings block access from Santa Fe into the SGEC site.

0’ 100’ 200’ 300’ 400’ North Scale approximate

Land Uses Residential Retail/Commercial Industrial LACCD Owned/Leased SGEC Project Area

B

C

D

2

3

4

5

6

7

1

2

3

4

LACCD Property18.5 Acres

SGEC Project Area 18.1

Acres (approx.)

E. 85th St.

E

E. Manchester St.

3 4

HON Site

4D

3Bus Stop 2 7

A B 11

Bus Stop

5

65

12

BusStop A

BusStop

BusStop

E. 89th St.

C

A


Project site: neighborhood character

Commercial uses such as retail, auto service and fast food line the major streets near the site. Behind the commercial edge are single-family residences and apartment buildings.

A) Firestone Boulevard at Santa Fe -- southeast corner.

B) Strip mall businesses on Firestone.

Firestone Boulevard and Santa Fe Avenue are lined with commercial uses in a mix of free-standing buildings and strip malls, set back from the sidewalk in parking lots.

Along Firestone from Santa Fe westbound are a gas station, a small strip mall (donut shop, laundromat, and convenience store), and a used automobile dealership and service garage (Images A, B, C). Further west are ELAC’s current satellite campus the South Gate Educational Center and more fast-food (Images D, E). Past Alameda is another small strip mall with an adult bookstore, florist, salon, coffee shop and check cashing store.

At the northeast corner of the Firestone and Santa Fe intersection is a large shopping plaza with retail and fast food (Image F). Beyond this there are few

goods store (Image G).

The advent of the SGEC and its student population may have a positive effect on the quality and character of the commercial neighborhood.

Surrounding residential neighborhoods are pre- dominantly single-family homes in the areas south of Firestone (Image H) and north of the Southern Pacific Railroad, and multi-family apartments in the area east of Santa Fe (Image I).

The HON site, an industrial property, adjoins the SGEC site at west and is its closest “neighbor”. The two sites were integrated in the past, as evidenced by their compatible architecture, but a chain link fence now separates them. The HON site is vacant and run-down (Images J,K). While there is talk of its

D) Current ELAC satellite: South Gate Educational Center. E) Firestone Boulevard fast food. G) Santa Fe Avenue looking north. commercial establishments north along Santa Fe, other than a take-away snack stand and a second hand

possible redevelopment, the site’s ultimate disposition is uncertain.

F) Santa Fe Avenue at Firestone Boulevard - northeast corner.

H) Residential neighborhood - Firestone Plaza. I) Residential neighborhood - Orchard Place.

J) HON site - Firestone frontage.

K) HON site - Rear yard.

IK

G

FJ

E Firestone BoulevardD C B A

H

C) Auto service and retail.


Project site: site character

The site is characterized by buildings that are monuments to manufacturing history and landmarks in the City of South Gate. Below ground are remnants of former uses.

The Firestone Boulevard frontage is dominated by the 743-foot long facade of Building 1, behind a truck yard, decorative perimeter fence and street trees. Originally used for manufacturing, it now serves LACCD storage uses.

The largest open space on site is secluded from the streets: a truck yard which together with the land occupied by Building 4 comprises the site of the future SGEC campus. It is bounded on the south by the impressive 700-foot facade of Building 3.

B) Building 1 parking and truck yard. At the corner of Firestone and Santa Fe Avenue is the site’s most prominent feature, the tower of Building 2. This was the original office building of the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company and still contains offices.

The only roadway into this area is west of Buildings 1 and 3. Chain link fences separate it from the HON site at west and the Southern Pacific Railroad at north; otherwise views are unconstrained.

C) Building 2 at Firestone and Santa Fe. D) Buildings 2, 1 and 3 on Santa Fe.

E) Buildings 3 and 4 on Santa Fe.

The Santa Fe frontage of the site is a mix of varied facades, parking and truck loading areas. Building 4 stands on the property line, and blocks views and access into the heart of the site from Santa Fe. There is no landscaping anywhere along the frontage.

Visually, Buildings 1, 2 and 3 are distinctive for their attractive Mediterranean Revival architectural style, but Building 4 is perfunctory and lacks character.

This was once an active manufacturing site, and several small and large structures such as small shops and storage buildings not present today previously existed in the large truck yard. Two abandoned 10,000 gallon fuel oil tanks, plus water tower footings and a well head have been discovered below ground in the area, along with an abandoned 19,000 SF underground reservoir that has been backfilled. The fuel oil tanks have been removed, and a closure report has been submitted.

F) Fence wall and (locked) gate on Firestone Boulevard. G) Main gate at driveway on Firestone Boulevard. H) Truck yard behind Buildings 4 and 3.

I) View north from Building 3, Building 4 at right. This will be the main area of the SGEC campus. Building 4 will be demolished. The water tower is across Santa Fe Avenue and not part of the project site.

A) Firestone Frontage - Buildings 1 and 2 and street trees.

Building 1

B Truck Yard

H

BuildingTruck 4Yard

I Building 3 E

D

Firestone Boulevard

G A F C


Project site: historical aspects

The project site and its existing buildings are eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places as the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company South Gate Historic District.

Circa 1928: Buildings 1 and 3 (center) were subsequently expanded. Circa 1928: Building 1 (left), Building 3 (center rear), Building 2.

The Historic District includes Buildings 1-4 on the SGEC site, the pedestrian bridge connecting Buildings 1 and 2, and two buildings on the HON site plus the gateposts, gatehouses, and fence wall along the street frontages of both properties.

The historic eligibility of the site and buildings is based on their association with the industrial history and automobile culture of Southern California and their Italianate Mediterranean Revival architectural style.

This eligibility does not, however, carry with it any specific requirements for preservation.

Buildings 1, 2 and 3 on the SGEC site were built for the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company as manufacturing and warehousing facilities. They were designed by the Los Angeles firm Curlett and Beelman, and first occupied in 1928. Buildings on the HON site were added in 1941, and have similar architectural character. Building 4 on the SGEC site was constructed more recently, and does not have any architectural distinction. Firestone vacated the property in 1980.

Due to their large scale and architectural distinctive- ness, the Buildings 1 and 2 have iconic presence in the South Gate community. Building 3, though not as noticeable from the street, is integral to the ensemble.

The Master Plan proposes Buildings 1, 3 & 4 to be demolished for the SGEC. B u i l d i n g 4 i s the least attractive building on site, and architecturally unrelated to the others.

The fence wall and associated gateways and gate- house (Images G,H on Page 6) on the street front property line are elements that contribute to the Historic District. The fence wall and associated gateway will be demolished along the frontage of the SCEG project and only the wall fronting Building 2 shall remain.

The Historical Report in the appendix of this Master Plan document describes historic issues in greater detail.

A) Existing elevation: Buildings 1, 3 and 4 east facades facing Santa Fe Avenue.

B) Existing elevation: Building 1 south facade facing Firestone Boulevard. The facade is 743 feet long.

C) Existing elevation: Building 3 north facade. This facade is today partially obscured by Building 4

Building 1 Building 3 Building 4

Building4

C Building 3

ABuilding 1

Firestone BBuilding 2

Historic Fence Wall


Project site: existing building uses

Buildings 2 is not part of the South Gate Educational Center, and will remain in vacant . Buildings 1, 3 & 4 will be demolished to make room for the new SGEC campus.

A) South facade of Building 1. Building 1 will remain in use as a warehouse. Truck docks will continue to be used as well.

B) Building 1 interior. The building is mostly one level having high truss ceilings, with portions having mezzanine levels.

Building 1 is a large-span, steel-framed industrial building with a 259,696 SF footprint, used as a warehouse by LACCD and others who lease space from the District.

Building 2 is an office building outside the boundary of the SGEC project, and no alterations to it are proposed.

Building 3, literally attached to Building 1, is also in use as a warehouse. It is concrete-framed, four stories high, with a 296,358 SF footprint. The SGEC

Building 4 is a warehouse with a 220,550 SF footprint that will be demolished for the SGEC campus. The 3rd floor bridge and 1st floor passageway connecting it with Building 3, and the small extension of Building 4 between the two buildings, will also be demolished.

C) North facade of Building 3. Building will remain in use as a warehouse, but truck yard will be eliminated for the SGEC campus.

D) Building 3 interior. Building is a concrete structure with low ceilings, currently mostly vacant.

E) Bridge linking Building 3 (R) with Building 4 (L) will be demolished.

F) Building 2 will remain as an office building, unrelated to the SGEC. Bridge connects to Building 1.

The north-south driveway west of Buildings 1 and 3 is currently utilitarian, unadorned and unattractive. It will be improved as part of the Master Plan to make it suitable for its new role as an entry to the SGEC campus. Improvements will include new pavement, a sidewalk, landscaping and lighting.

G) Roadway on west side of Buildings 1 and 3 will be improved to H) East facade of Building 4 on Santa Fe Avenue. This building and its con- I) Building 4 interior. Building has two stories with high ceilings

will be closed.

B Building 1

Building4

IC

DE

Building 3H

Building 2

GA

SGEC master Plan: general overview


This general overview identifies key parameters that affect the Master Plan. It also outlines the site improvements and new construction proposed in the Plan, explained in more detail on the following pages.

Zoning The SGEC site is zoned M3 Heavy Manufacturing by the City of South Gate.

On Firestone Boulevard, an improved existing entry will access the campus via an improved existing roadway.

New SGEC Surface Parking Surface parking for the SGEC, designated for faculty staff and visitors will be provided.

Diagram: Master Plan above has been Superseded.

Aerial Photo:

Permitted Height Buildings may be up to 85’ high providing they are set back 20’ or more from property lines not on streets or alleys. Proposed SGEC buildings are within this limit.

Floor/Area Ratio (FAR): Maximum total floor area in all buildings may not exceed four times the area of the lot. The SGEC’s total floor area of existing buildings plus proposed new buildings is less than half this allowable maximum.

Setbacks Setbacks are subject to review by the City of South Gate. The Master Plan proposes a “front yard” between the new SGEC building and the street.

Project Timeline The design/build team will be selected November 2016, design will be completed October 2017, Division of the State Architect (DSA) review will be completed June 2018, and construction will occur from July 2018 to December 2020.

SGEC Projected Population 2019-2031 The initial SGEC student population for 2019 is projected at 5,000. The ultimate population for 2031 is 9,000. By comparison, the existing South Gate Educational Center has 5,000 students. There will be approximately 150 faculty and staff at the SGEC.

SGEC Campus Boundary and Entries Buildings 1, 2, 3 &4 are part of the campus. The SGEC campus area will be south side of the site.

New Internal Roadway The Master Plan proposes a new 28-foot-wide roadway to provide vehicular circulation within the campus. It will serve fire truck access, and have landscaped edges to enhance its appearance. Passenger drop- offs will be located along this internal roadway; there will be no drop offs on public streets.

Enhanced Existing Roadway The existing roadway west of Buildings 1 and 3 will be repaved and enhanced with a sidewalk and landscaping along its eastern side.

New SGEC Building The Master Plan proposes a new SGEC classroom/office building of 102,911 GSF, a “campus in a building” housing administrative offices, classrooms, labs, academic support and student services and more as required by the college. It will be three stories and approximately 50 feet high.

SGEC Parking Requirements SGEC requires at least 1,350 parking stalls for its 9,000 students and 150 faculty/staff. A 750 stall parking lot will initially be built on the southern part of the property for this project. Development on the northern part of the property for the remaining 600 vehicles are planned for the future.

SGEC Building Service Access The Master Plan does not specify the location of service access for the proposed new building, as this is contingent on the building design as developed by the design/build team selected for the project. Service access will be concealed from public streets.

Open Space and Landscaping The Master Plan proposes a new, landscaped central open space as a campus gathering place for casual activity and special events. Other landscaping will accent the street frontage, internal roadway, and other areas within the project site.

Existing Building Usage Buildings 2 will remain in their current use. Access to this building will be maintained on the south and east sides corner of the property per existing, but truck access on the west side will remain.

Existing Building Parking Requirements Provision of parking for the existing office Building 2 will be provided per requirements to be verified.

Program and Design Criteria Along with the Master Plan, a South Gate Educational Center Program and Design Criteria book has been prepared providing detailed specifications for the site improvements and buildings described here in overview. This will be the reference used by design/build team selected to implement the project.

NOTE: Diagrams on this and other pages illustrate concepts of the Master Plan but are not actual designs. The final design of the SGEC

LACCD property outlined in red, SGEC project area outlined in yellow

Street address and main visitor entry will be on Santa Fe Avenue.

will be determined by the Design/Build Team selected for the project by ELAC and LACCD.

Existing buildings to remain “as is”

Parking structure entry on Santa Fe

New internal roadway -- access

to parking

Improved existing roadway

Improved general

North

Campus area is north of Building 3

New parking structure Landscaped

Santa Fe frontage

New surface parking

New open space

New building

New main visitor entry on Santa Fe

Building 3

Building 1 Building 2

entry at Firestone

Property line Firestone Boulevard

Prop

erty

line


SGEC master Plan: Key concepts

KEY CONCEPTS HAVE BEEN SUPERSEDED PER NEW MASTER PLAN The characteristics of the site, the goals and needs of East Los Angeles College and the concerns of the City of South Gate are addressed in the SGEC Master Plan.

Retain loading dock

Abandon

Demolish Building

4

Demolish bridge

HON access maintained per existing

Fence 15’ from non-SGEC buildings

No access from campus

Truck access

A) Clearance of the Campus Site. To create space for the campus, Buildings 1, 3 & 4 will be demolished. It is unneeded, has no potential for adaptive re-use, and blocks access from Santa Fe. The truck yard will be abandoned; retaining it even in part would be incompatible with the campus. The loading dock at Building 3 will remain in place but will not be used.

B) Perimeter Definition. The SGEC campus proper will be in the area north of Building 3. This area will have a secure, gated

truck yard Demolish passageway

and office

Building 3

Building 1 Building 2

Firestone Boulevard

No access from roadway at west

Building 3

Building 1

Internal connection (fork lifts)

Loading docks / ramps

Truck yard

Firestone Boulevard

Truck access maintained per existing

Building 2

maintained per existing perimeter (fences, walls, other) aesthetically complementary to the campus

and the neighborhood. Gates will be few in number for security, but located conveniently for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The roadway connecting to Firestone Boulevard is not in the gated area because it is shared with Buildings 1 and the HON site, but it will be improved as part of the Master Plan.

C) Operations Outside the SGEC Campus. Buildings 1 and 3 will remain in use as warehouses. Trucks will use loading docks and ramps on the buildings’ east and south sides; those on the west side will be closed. Building 3 can share Building 1’s loading

A) Clearance of the Campus Site B) Perimeter Definition C) Existing Operations Outside the SGEC Campus

docks, as the two are internally connected. The buildings will be fenced from campus areas because they are on LACCD property but do not comply with DSA codes. Access to the HON site will not be hindered by SGEC development, but will remaining per existing. Building 2 will remain as an office building.

D) Entry Locations and Hierarchy. The SGEC campus will be visible from Santa Fe Avenue but not Firestone Boulevard. Thus, the Master Plan proposes the main SGEC entries be on Santa Fe, and the Firestone entry be secondary though enhanced with SGEC identity. Santa Fe entries will align with existing streets.

E) Parking Strategy. Parking will be located so as to allow maximum area at the campus “heart” for the new SGEC building and open space. The parking structure necessary to serve the SGEC’s population will be located at the north to screen railroad views and noise. It will offer direct Santa Fe access for its everyday users. Campus entries on Santa Fe and Firestone will lead to surface parking at the west of the site designated primarily for visitors, and to the parking structure.

D) Entry Locations and Hierarchy

E) Parking Strategy

F) Internal Roadway

F) Internal Roadway. An internal roadway will connect entries with parking. It will have sidewalks, and pull-out lanes for passenger - drop-offs. Surface parking lot will be a turn-around for vehicles to return to the entry from which they entered the site.

Firestone entry:

visitors, all users

Building 1

Block noise and view of RR

Parking structure

Direct structure entry:students, faculty, staff, highest traffic volume

“Front Door” entry:visitors, all users

Surface Campus “heart”parking

Internal roadway

Building 3

Building 2

Firestone Boulevard

Secondary SGEC entry

Building 1

Gated

HON Site Street Primary SGEC entries, aligned with cross

t tSGEC visibility

Gated entry

Gated

Building 3

Roadway shared with

HON

Building 2

SGEC identity on street

Firestone Boulevard

Building 1

Parkingstructure

Surfaceparking

Return loop Passenger

drop-offs

Building 3

Building 2

Firestone Boulevard

Building 1

Gate Secureperimeter

(location may vary)HON Site

SGEC

roadway improvements outside secure

SGEC campusinside

secure perimeterGate

Gate Number and locations of gates may vary

Building 3

Building 2

SGEC entry improvements

at Firestone

Fi t B l d


SGEC master Plan: Key concepts

The new SGEC Building is located for visibility and presence in the community. The Master Plan acknowledges future changes that may affect the site.

F) New Building Location-SUPERSEDED

G) New Open Space Location-SUPERSEDED

H) Fire Access-SUPERSEDED

F,G) New Building and Open Space. The Master Plan proposes locating the new SGEC classroom and office building close to Santa Fe Avenue for maximum visibility and “street presence”, and for easiest pedestrian access to Metro bus stops on Firestone Boulevard. The Plan proposes a major campus open space west of the building as an “oasis” from dense urban development, a centralized pedestrian circulation and activity space secluded from street traffic.

H) Fire Access. In the City of South Gate, the LA County Fire Department is the responding agency and determines fire code requirements. Per requirements, the Master Plan provides for fire truck access to within 150 feet of all building exterior walls by means of code-compliant fire access lanes and use of city streets. For public schools, the minimum access lane width is 20 feet. Elsewhere, fire trucks will use the internal roadway having a 28-foot width.

I) Traffic Control. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the SGEC warrants signalization (traffic lights) at main entries. The SGEC Master Plan proposes signalization at the entry on Santa Fe Avenue at Orchard Place (main building & lot entry) wh i ch w i l l hav e t he h i gh es t t r a f f i c v o l um e and the entry on Firestone Boulevard. Left-turn lanes on the streets are proposed at all two entries.

J) Future Widening of Firestone Boulevard. The South Gate General Plan 2035 calls for widening Firestone by eight feet on each side. This will narrow the space in front of Buildings 1 and 2, The Master Plan eliminates the wall/fence along the frontage of building 1 but not Building 2.

NOTE: Diagrams on this and other pages illustrate concepts of the Master Plan but are not actual designs and have been superseded. The final design of the SGEC will be determined by the Design/Build Team selected for the project by ELAC and LACCD and based on the updated Master Plan.

I) Traffic Control-SUPERSEDED J) Future Widening of Firestone Boulevard

Building 1 Less maneuvering Fewer area for trucks parking stalls

Building 3

Building 2

FirestoneBoulevard

Property linemoves 8’ back

Firestone widens8’ on each side

Building 1

Truckaccess around parking structur

Turn-arounds(if required by site design) *

Fire truck circulationwithin the site *

Fire accessfrom street

Building 3

Building 2

FirestoneBoulevard * This diagram and others are for illustrative purposes only. Actual fire access route will depend on design of the SGEC

Building 1

Signalized intersection

Left-turn lane

Left-turn lane

Building 3

Building 2

Left-turn lane

Signalized intersection

Firestone Boulevard

Building 1

Sun exposure Open

space Heart of campus Provides

buffer zone

Building 3

Building 2

Firestone Boulevard

Building 1

Proximity to parking

Relation to open space

New building

Building 3

Visibility and presence on Santa Fe

Building 2 Pedestrian accessfrom bus stops

Firestone Boulevard

Bus stops


SGEC master Plan: vehicular and Pedestrian

Vehicular Circulation: New and enhanced street entries, internal roadways, and parking will serve autos, service, and emergency vehicles.

Pedestrian Circulation: Most pedestrian traffic will be between parking and the SGEC building; some will walk-in from transit stops on Firestone.

desirable noise and odors from the street and campus.

The South Gate General Plan 2035 Mobility Element indicates a Class II Bike Lane will pass the SGEC on Santa Fe Avenue and designates the site as a “Bicycle Hub”. The SGEC will provide bicycle racks and related amenities as required by the city.

Fire truck access to within 150 feet of all building exterior walls will be provided via the internal roadway and designated fire lanes, all in compliance with LA County Fire Department requirements. Emergency vehicles will also use these routes.

Fire truck turnarounds may be incorporated into campus open space if required by the overall configuration of the campus.

Truck yards and parking serving Buildings 1, 2, and 3 outside the campus area will remain in their present use and condition.

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

By far, more people will drive to the campus than will walk in. Thus the greatest volume of pedestrian traffic will occur between the parking structure and the SGEC building. The next largest will be the between the surface parking lot and the building. Pedestrians will enter the building either directly from parking or via intermediary open spaces.

Some people will walk to the campus from bus stops on Firestone Boulevard and between the campus and the food, retail, and services areas at Santa Fe and Firestone. All campus pedestrian entries will be gated to control after-hours access.

A new sidewalk into the campus will be included in the improvements to the entry drive from Firestone; however, this is not expected to be a much-used path of travel.

VEHICULAR CIRCULATION

The SGEC campus will be visible only from Santa Fe Avenue, so the “front door” entry for visitors will be here, aligned with Or- chard Place. A left-turn lane for northbound vehicles is proposed on Santa Fe. Traffic volume is anticipated to be less than at other entries, so signalization is not proposed

The existing entry at Firestone Boulevard will be improved, with new SGEC identity. Due to anticipated traffic volume, signalization is proposed. South Gate’s General Plan 2035 shows a median in Firestone; the SGEC Master Plan proposes a left-turn lane.

The existing entry drive from Firestone will be repaved, and its

east side will be improved with a new sidewalk and landscaping. Existing truck loading docks, ramps and structures will remain in place but truck access will no longer be allowed.

Access to the HON site will be maintained per existing.

Security gates will be installed at all vehicular entries to the main area of the campus to control after-hours access.

A two-lane internal campus roadway will connect all entries, surface parking, and parking structure. Turn-out lanes for passenger drop-offs will be located along this roadway.

A parking lot designated primarily for visitors will be located with

visibility to the entry of the SGEC building. It is estimated to park 60 cars.

A parking structure mainly for students, faculty, and staff will hold an estimated 1,600 cars, one level at grade, five above, and a partial level below. Its main entry will be directly off Santa Fe Avenue at Ardmore Avenue. This is anticipated to have the highest traffic volume of all campus entries, so signalization and a northbound left-turn lane on Santa Fe are proposed here.

Optimal location of delivery, trash pick-up and service access to the SGEC building will depend on the design of the building. It may be via the site’s internal roadway or a turnout from Santa Fe. Access will be designed to screen unsightly views and un-

Entries to the building will be based on pedestrian circulation patterns and optimization of security, so will most likely be internal to the campus and not open toward Santa Fe Avenue.

The Master Plan proposes a new crosswalk at the new signalized intersection on Firestone.

No significant number of walk-ins are expected from surrounding residential neighborhoods. The Master Plan does not propose any changes to existing connections to these areas.

NOTE: Diagrams on this and other pages illustrate concepts of the Master Plan but are not actual designs. The final design of the SGEC will be determined by the Design/Build Team selected for the project by ELAC and LACCD.

H E

L

C

Building 1

K

SGEC parking

structure G

I

D ESGEC

surface ki

SGEC Building

J

F E

A

Building 3

M

To 110 Freeway B

Freeway M Bldg. 2 M

Firestone Boulevard

FEC circulation

All vehicles Fire/emergency only Service access (alternatives) Gated entries

Other site circulation to remain

Vehicular circulation Truck loading docks / ramps Truck yard / parking Parking only

Public streets

Major arterial street Collector street

Proposed city bike lanes Existing signalized Proposed signalized intersection intersections

N

Q

Building 1

S

SGEC parkingstructure

N SSGEC

surfaceki

QPedestrian

zones

SGECBuilding

OBuilding 3

P

Building 2

RFirestoneBoulevard Bus lines 315,115

S

Major pedestrian routes Gated access Bus routes

Secondary pedestrian routes Existingcrosswalks Bus stops

Campus pedestrian zones Proposedcrosswalks Offsite food, retail, services

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

I

N

O

P

Q

R

J

L

M

K

H

S


SGEC master Plan: landscaPe and oPen

The SGEC site currently has no dedicated pedestrian space and virtually no greenery. The Master Plan proposes new open spaces and landscaping to create an urban campus.

The term “landscape” here refers to the combination of greenery, varied plant materials, pedestrian spaces, decorative hardscape and other elements that will be used to create a pleasant open space environment within the SGEC campus and an attractive “face” to the surrounding streets.

Sustainability in landscaping is a goal of LACCD. The arid conditions of the region call for water-saving landscape strategies. At the SGEC these will include use of drought-tolerant plants, low-volume irrigation design, and minimization of runoff.

The Master Plan identifies distinct landscape zones on the site. The diagrams and images on this pages illustrate the concepts but are not actual designs. The final designs will be determined by the Design/Build Team selected for the project by ELAC and LACCD.

The large open space at the center of the campus will be developed as a place for student gatherings, a forecourt for the SGEC building and a counterpoint to the mass of Building 3 and the parking structure. As the symbolic “heart” of the campus, it will include active and passive recreation space, amenities for performances and ceremonies, study areas, public art, and greenery and shade.

Campus entries will have special landscaping and signage to highlight their presence and identify the SGEC.

The street edge of the campus along Santa Fe Avenue will be landscaped compatibly with City of South Gate standards.

The SGEC building will have a landscaped “front yard” on Santa Fe Avenue. It will be visible from the street but accessible only from within the campus.

Landscaping near the parking structure will use vertical elements to mitigate the structure’s visual impact on Santa Fe Avenue and the campus.

The area between Building 3 and the campus security fence will be landscaped to relieve views of the loading dock and building. Alternately, the “fence” may itself be a green wall.

The internal roadway will be flanked with street trees and/or other landscape elements to visually separate it from campus public spaces and control pedestrian crossing points.

The east side of the entry drive from Firestone Boulevard will be landscaped to screen views of the building and abandoned loading areas. Landscaping will incorporate the new sidewalk running from Firestone to the campus.

Trees will be planted throughout the surface parking area to provide shade and visual relief.

Landscape screens (tall shrubs, green walls, etc.) may be used to control views from the SGEC to the HON site and the railroad.

Beyond the campus entries and campus frontage described above, the Master Plan does not propose any other landscape along Firestone Boulevard or Santa Fe Avenue,

Screen walls or other devices compatible with the SGEC landscape will be used to all hide service areas, trash enclosures and utility fixtures from view.

H

Building 1

Parkingstructure

E

J E

I ASurface parking

Openspace

Newbuilding D

B

GBuilding 3 F

Building 2

BFirestone Boulevard

A

B

C

E

F

G

H

I

J

D


Fec master Plan: camPus character

Site furnishings, lighting, signage and amenities are among the elements that will create an attractive, distinctive, and user-friendly SGEC campus.

The SGEC is an urban campus with an industrial heritage, a college with an eye toward the technologies of tomorrow.

The campus environment will express the character of the college with a sense of welcome, openness, and visual interest in a variety of settings to accommodate many different uses. It will offer spaces of varying scale for special events, social interaction and quiet study. It will project a distinctive identity through quality design to establish a special sense of place in the South Gate community.

The images on this page suggest some of the many possibilities for the SGEC campus. The actual design of the campus will be the result of a collaboration between ELAC, LACCD, and the Design/Build Team selected for the project.

Beyond architecture and landscaping, the Design- Build Team will be encouraged to achieve these goals through distinctive lighting, signage, street furniture, and amenities such as sunshades and decorative paving. Artworks may be incorporated to further enhance the campus environment.


Fec master Plan: Fec building and ParKing structure

The SGEC Building’s architecture will embody and support the college’s mission to provide excellence in education. The parking structure will complement the character of the campus and be designed for safety, security, and aesthetic quality.

SGEC BUILDING

The Master Plan proposes a new three-story classroom and office building of approximately 102,911 gross square feet (GSF). It will be a “college in a building”, serving all the college’s academic and support needs in one place.

PARKING STRUCTURE

To meet the parking requirement for the SGEC’s estimated 9,150 students, faculty and staff, a parking structure is required. The overall concept is described here, and the final design will be developed by the Design/Build Team.

Contemporary and traditional architectural styles offer inspiration for the new SGEC Building and parking structure.

SGEC Building Adjacencies and Stacking - Conceptual Illustration Only, Not a Final Design

Parking Structure Entries - Conceptual Illustration Only, Not a Final Design

Aesthetically, the SGEC Building will be seen the context of existing Buildings 1, 2 and 3, which have been community landmarks for many decades. The building must, however, serve the requirements of its program and express a forward-looking attitude in keeping with the spirit of the college itself.

It will be the Design/Build Team’s task to establish an appropriate architectural character for the SGEC Building. The concept may bridge old and new through elements such as warm-toned coloration, a high percentage of walls to windows, rhythmic window shapes (no ribbon windows), recesses creating depth and strong shadows, towers at main entries and decorative accents. A very different approach may be to position the SGEC Building as a counterpoint to the existing buildings, which then become a backdrop against which the new building stands in deliberate contrast.

Functionally, the building’s administrative and student services offices, being primary destinations for visitors and many students, will be located on the ground floor near the main entry. Classrooms, labs and other student support spaces will be on upper floors. Vertical circulation will be clearly emphasized and designed to knit the levels together perceptually into a cohesive whole.

The concepts and images here indicate a direction for the building’s architecture and configuration based on input from the college. The actual design will be developed by the Design/Build Team selected by ELAC and LACCD to carry the SGEC project forward.

The structure will provide approximately 1,600 parking stalls, with one level at grade, five above, and one partial level below grade. Levels will be naturally ventilated except the below grade level, which may have lightwells to qualify for S2 occupancy but will require supplemental mechanical ventilation. The structure will be Type 1 construction, fully sprinkled, with three means of egress provided for each level.

“Everyday” users students, faculty, and staff will mostly use the structure’s direct entrance off Santa Fe Avenue. A traffic signal will be provided at this intersection with Santa Fe and Ardmore Avenues to handle the large volume of traffic anticipated. All other campus entries will lead to the structure as well. Self-parking with prepaid passes or pay-by-space machines will eliminate queueing at “ticket-spitters” at structure entries. The Traffic Analysis in the Appendix of this document provides further details on anticipated traffic.

As a dominant part of the campus approximately 60’ high, the structure will be designed as an aesthetic as set to the campus and neighborhood and will be well illuminated inside and out for nighttime operation.

Photovoltaic panels on the top level will shade parked vehicles and generate electricity for the SGEC per LACCD mandate.

Classroom/Lab Building, Stanford University

Stockton Campus Center, NJ

3rd Level Science Cluster

Shared Classrooms

Career TechnologyEducation Cluster

2nd LevelHealth Center

Shared Classrooms

Arts Cluster

AcademicSupport

Student Lounge

Library

Service Entry

1st Level Plant Facilities Bookstore

SharedClassrooms

Student Services

MainEntry

PhysicalEducation

AdministrationGroup

Parking Structure, Santa Monica

Classroom/Lab Building, Stanford University

Parking structure, Georgia Tech

University of Arizona Medical Center

Building 1

Signalizedintersection

Parkingstructure

Direct access forstudents, faculty and staff -

highest traffic volume

Surfaceparking

Access via othercampus entries -

secondary traffic volumes

Left-turnlanes

Building 3

Building 2


Fec master Plan: sustainability strategies

ENERGY DESIGN STRATEGIES

High Performance Building Envelope Green Power • Use high-performance insulation • Provide at least 10% of • Optimize shading building’s electricity from • Use high performance glazing renewable sources

Water Use Reduction • Limit the use of project site’s

potable water, natural surface or subsurface water resources for landscape irrigation

SGEC LEED CERTIFICATION

The SGEC will be LEED certified in the categories of Indoor Environmental Quality, Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materials & Resources, and Innovation in Design Process.

In accordance with LACCD directives, the SGEC will be designed and constructed using the United States Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design N e w Construction (USGBC LEEDNC) rating system. The goal is to reach the highest certification level feasible. The project has been preregistered as LEEDNC v3.0.

The diagram shown here highlights the credits most relevant to the SGEC in the categories of the LEED checklist. For detailed descriptions of LEED strategies specifically prepared for the SGEC and estimated costs for obtaining associated credits, see the LEED Strategy Narrative and scorecard scenarios in the Appendix of this document.

Photovoltaic canopies atop the parking structure roof will

contribute to the SGEC achieving maximum LEED credits.

INNOVATION IN DESIGN STRATEGIES

Green Cleaning Program • Reduce exposure to potentially hazardous chemical

contaminants that adversely impact air quality, occupant well-being, and the environment

Kiosk and Signage Green Education Program • Promote and heighten public awareness of

sustainability

Exemplary Performance • An innovation point can be earned for exemplary

performance in selected credits

WATER EFFICIENCY DESIGN STRATEGIES

Low Flow Water Efficiency Plumbing Fixtures

Water Use Reduction •

• Include faucets, toilets,urinals, shower heads

Limit the use of projectsite’s potable water, natural surface or subsurface water resourcesfor landscape irrigation

MATERIALS & RESOURCES DESIGN STRATEGIES Occupant Recycling Program

Recycled Content • Use recycled building materials including

fly-ash concrete mixture

Sustainable Wood • Use salvaged, recycled and FSC (Forest

Stewardship Council) Certified wood products

Construction Waste Management • Divert construction waste from landfills for

recycling and salvage

INDOOR AIR QUALITY DESIGN STRATEGIES

Manually Operable Windows Post-Construction Flush Out• Specify for natural ventilation • Remove construction pollutants prior to building

occupation Low VOC Materials • Reduce off-gassing of finishes, Healthy Materials

adhesives and sealants • Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring • Provide CO2 alarms, air flow

sensors

Avoid building materials that use or releasePersistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBTs) including: PVC, VCT, vinyl siding, bromatedflame retardants (BFRs)

SITE DESIGN STRATEGIES

Building Orientation • Maximize south-facing exposure • Minimize and protect west-facing

windows

Landscaping • Maximize vegetated open space

Stormwater Design • Maximize Infiltration on-site


APPENDIX: CONSULTANT

This Master Plan document is supplemented by a separate Appendix document that goes into the project’s technical issues in greater detail. Its contents are summarized below.

CIVIL REPORT PREPARED BY: KPFF 6080 Center Drive, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Tricia Johns, P.E., Principal [email protected] Shahrzad Bigonah, P.E. [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Easements • Descriptions and locations of existing easements

on SGEC property

Storm Water • Analysis of 11 hydrologic sub-tributary areas,

storm water peak flow, storm water runoff and identification of existing storm drain locations.

• Recommendations for onsite storm drain pipes (remove any existing onsite storm drains interfering with new building and parking structure construction), storm water treatment requirements, best Management Practice (BMP) selection, connection to LA County storm drain pipes.

Sanitary Sewer System • Identification of sanitary sewer pipes, analysis of

Sewer system capacity. • Recommendations for sewer pipe work (Remove

all sewer pipes located at the north side of the project and provide temporary cap at the 16” lateral located on Santa Fe Avenue for future connection).

Water Systems • Analysis of existing domestic and fire water

systems, fire flow availability, identification of existing water meter, hydrant and fire hose connections on site (two 2” domestic water meters and one 8” fire service meter on Firestone Boulevard, seven onsite fire hydrants, three offsite hydrants).

• Recommendations for new fire hydrant locations, design guidelines (A new fire service, minimum 6”, should be installed to serve the new building).

MEP STRATEGIES PREPARED BY: GLUMAC 617 W. 7th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 900173830 Edwin Lee, P.E., Managing Principal [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Mechanical Design • Description of applicable codes and standards. • Analysis of HVAC design criteria: outdoor and

ind oor design criteria, building envelope, air distribution and pipework design criteria, central plant systems temperatures.

• Recommendations of HVAC systems to be considered: basement precooling/heating system, radiant heating/cooling, central plant, geothermal and building management systems and energy reducing HVAC strategies.

Electrical Design • Description of applicable codes and standards. • Analysis of incoming service, recommendations

for power distribution for existing buildings, new building and parking structure, emergency power, lighting, telephone and data, fire alarm and security systems.

• Analysis of solar power generation and feasible locations for solar panel arrays.

Plumbing Design • Description of applicable codes and standards. • Analysis of existing domestic water service. • Recommendations for efficient domestic water

heating, grey water treatment, low-flow plumbing fixtures/drains, piping and insulation materials.

Existing Utilities • Identification of existing electrical utility

equipment locations, points of electrical service to existing buildings, existing domestic water and sewer lines, existing gas lines.

• Recommendations for meeting power load requirements.

STRUCTURAL

ANALYSIS PREPARED BY: John A. Martin & Associates 25129 The Old Road, Suite 316 Stevenson Ranch, CA 91381 Chuck Whitaker, Principal [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

New SGEC Building • General description of proposed SGEC Building. • Vertical load system and vibration requirements. • Lateral load system requirements. • Foundation elements and superstructure- of-

foundation connections. • Structural Parameters. • Structural Observations. • Testing and Inspections. • Modifications to existing structures.

HISTORICAL REPORT PREPARED BY: SWCA 625 Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 190 South Pasadena, CA 91030 Shannon Carmack, Architectural Historian [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Property Significance and History • Property Background and History • Project Plan

Historic Preservation Goals

Character-Defining Features • Site and Buildings

Project Implementation • Recommendations Construction of new buildings should be differentiated from the old and compatible with their massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS PREPARED BY: Linscott Law & Greenspan, Engineers 236 North Chester Avenue, Suite 200, Pasadena, CA 91106 Clare M. LookJaeger, P.E., Principal [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Transportation System/Network • Description of existing multimodal transportation

network including major freeways, arterials, transit and bicycle systems.

• Description of adjacent roadway characteristics.

Transportation Master Planning Principles/Goals • Description of transportation strategies employed

in SGEC Master plan including: multimodal access opportunities, transit/shuttle integration, efficient circulation system for all users, and a safe and effective pedestrian experience.

Master Plan Circulation And Parking • Analysis of vehicular circulation and

recommended signals for new campus access points.

• Analysis of non-vehicular circulation and pedestrian pathways from entries at Santa Fe Avenue and Firestone Boulevard to all buildings.

• Analysis of proposed new parking structure including parking counts, appropriate control lanes to mitigate congestion.

LEED STRATEGIES PREPARED BY: Antea Group 3229 E. Spring Street, Suite 201 Long Beach, CA 90806 Amber Keenoy, LEED AP BD+C, Senior Consultant [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Overview • Description of LEED certification process and

certification levels.

Credit Summaries & Recommendations • Descriptions of strategies and associated costs

to achieve LEED credits in each of the LEED NC 2.2 Rating System categories: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materials & Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, and Innovation in Design.

Sample Scorecards • Sample scorecards for three SGEC certification

scenarios: two at Gold level and one at Platinum.

April 16, 2013

EAST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE SOUTH GATE EDUCATIONAL CENTER MASTER PLAN 2015 APPENDIX

The Appendix contains reports provided by the Civil, Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing, Structural, Histori- cal, Traffic, and LEED consultants of the SGEC Master Plan Team. These give an overview of the existing site and its buildings together with general recommendations for the Master Plan, and are based on the following resources:

• ELAC South Gate Educational Center

Final Environmental Impact Report 2009 prepared by: Terry Hayes Associates LLC 8522 National Boulevard, Suite 102 Culver City, CA 90232

• City of South Gate General Plan 2035

prepared by: City of South Gate, December 2009

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consultant Narratives

CIVIL REPORT

Easements EXHIBIT 1. EXISTING EASEMENTS

Storm Water

A 02

A 03-10

A 03

A 04

MEP STRATEGIES

Plumbing Design

Existing Utilities EXHIBIT 1. EXISTING UTILITIES MAP

A 11-17

A14-15

A15

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

BUILDING 1 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN BUILDING 1 - CROSS SECTION

Plans / Elevations BUILDING 2 - SECOND FLOOR PLAN

A 16-17

A 17

HISTORICAL REPORT

Character-Defi ning Features

Project Implementation References

A 18-19

A 18 A 19

A 19

LEED STRATEGIES

Water Effi ciency

Energy & Atmosphere Materials & Resources

A 21-44

A 26-27

A 27-30

A 30-33

EXHIBIT 2. EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM EXHIBIT SD.1 SANTE FE Q ALLOWABLE EXHIBIT SD.2 SOUTH GATE Q ALLOWABLE

BUILDING 2 - SOUTH ELEVATION

BUILDING 3 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN

BUILDING 3 - NORTH ELEVATION

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Transportation System/Network

A 20

Indoor Environmental Quality Innovation & Design Process

LEED Scorecard: Gold Scenario ‘A’

A 33-37 A 38

A 39-40 Sanitary Sewer System EXHIBIT 3. EXISTING SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM EXHIBIT SS.1 LOADINGS FOR WATER SYSTEMS

Water Systems EXHIBIT 4. EXISTING DOMESTIC & FIRE

WATER SYSTEMS EXHIBIT FW.1 TABLE: FIRE FLOW AVAILABILITY

A 07 A 09

BUILDING 4 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN

BUILDING 4 - SOUTH ELEVATION Transportation Master Planning Principles/Goals

Master Plan Circulation and Parking LEED Scorecard: Gold Scenario ‘B’

LEED Scorecard: Platinum Scenario ‘C’

A 41-42

A 43-44

Mechanical Design A 11-12 Building Descriptions / Impact on Bldg.3 A 16 Property Signifi cance and History A 18 Executive Summary A 21

Electrical Design A 13-14 Plans / Elevations A 16 Historic Preservation Goals A 18 Sustainable Sites A 22-26

April 16, 2013 FIRESTONE EDUCATIONAL CENTER MASTER PLAN 2013 APPENDIX A 2

CIVIL REPORT MEP STRATEGIES STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS TRAFFIC ANALYSIS LEED STRATEGIES PREPARED BY: KPFF 6080 Center Drive, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Tricia Johns, P.E.,Principal [email protected] Shahrzad Bigonah, P.E. [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Easements • Descriptions and locations of existing easements

on SGEC property

Storm Water • Analysis of 11 hydrologic sub-tributary areas,

storm water peak fl ow, storm water runoff and identification of existing storm drain locations.

• Recommendations for on-site storm drain pipes (remove any existing on-site storm drains interfering with new building and parking structure construction), storm water treatment requirements, Best Management Practice (BMP) selection, connection to LA County storm drain pipes.

Sanitary Sewer System • Identification of sanitary sewer pipes, analysis of

sewer system capacity. • Recommendations for sewer pipe work (Remove

all sewer pipes located at the north side of the project and provide temporary cap at the 16” lateral located on Santa Fe Avenue for future connection).

Water Systems • Analysis of existing domestic and fi re water sys-

tems, fi re flow availability, identification of existing water meter, hydrant and fi re hose connections on site (two 2” domestic water meters and one 8” fi re service meter on Firestone Boulevard, seven on-site fi re hydrants, three off-site hydrants).

• Recommendations for new fi re hydrant locations, design guidelines (A new fi re service, minimum 6”, should be installed to serve the new building).

PREPARED BY: GLUMAC 617 W. 7th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90017-3830 Edwin Lee, P.E., Managing Principal [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Mechanical Design • Description of applicable codes and standards. • Analysis of HVAC design criteria: outdoor and in-

door design criteria, building envelope, air distribution and pipework design criteria, central plant systems temperatures.

• Recommendations of HVAC systems to be considered: basement pre-cooling/heating system, radiant heating/cooling, central plant, geothermal and building management systems and energy- reducing HVAC strategies.

Electrical Design • Description of applicable codes and standards. • Analysis of incoming service, recommendations

for power distribution for existing buildings, new building and parking structure, emergency power, lighting, telephone and data, fi re alarm and security systems.

• Analysis of solar power generation and feasible locations for solar panel arrays.

Plumbing Design • Description of applicable codes and standards. • Analysis of existing domestic water service. • Recommendations for efficient domestic water

heating, grey water treatment, low-flow plumbing fixtures/drains, piping and insulation materials.

Existing Utilities • Identification of existing electrical utility equip-

ment locations, points of electrical service to existing buildings, existing domestic water and sewer lines, existing gas lines.

• Recommendations for meeting power load requirements.

PREPARED BY: John A. Martin & Associates 25129 The Old Road, Suite 316 Stevenson Ranch, CA 91381 Chuck Whitaker, Principal [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

New SGEC Building • General description of proposed SGEC Building. • Vertical load system and vibration requirements. • Lateral load system requirements. • Foundation elements and superstructure-to-foun-

dation connections. • Structural Parameters. • Structural Observations. • Testing and Inspections. • Modifications to existing structures.

HISTORICAL REPORT PREPARED BY: SWCA 625 Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 190 South Pasadena, CA 91030 Shannon Carmack, Architectural Historian [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Property Significance and History • Property Background and History • Project Plan

Historic Preservation Goals

Character-Defi ning Features • Site and Buildings

Project Implementation • Recommendations • Construction of new buildings shall be differ-

entiated from the old and shall be compatible with their massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

PREPARED BY: Linscott Law & Greenspan, Engineers 600 South Lake Avenue, Suite 500 Pasadena, CA 91106 Clare M. Look-Jaeger, P.E., Principal [email protected] Alfred C. Ying, P.G, P,T.P., [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Transportation System/Network • Description of existing multi-modal transportation

network including major freeways, arterials, transit and bicycle systems.

• Description of adjacent roadway characteristics.

Transportation Master Planning Principles/Goals • Description of transportation strategies employed

in SGEC Master plan including: multi-modal access opportunities, transit/shuttle integration, effi cient circulation system for all users, and a safe and effective pedestrian experience.

Master Plan Circulation And Parking • Analysis of vehicular circulation and recommend-

ed signals for new campus access points • Analysis of non-vehicular circulation and pedes-

trian pathways from entries at Santa Fe Avenue and Firestone Boulevard to all buildings.

• Analysis of proposed new parking structure including parking counts, appropriate control lanes to mitigate congestion.

PREPARED BY: Antea Group 3229 E. Spring Street, Suite 201 Long Beach, CA 90806 Amber Keenoy, LEED AP BD+C, Senior Consultant [email protected]

NARRATIVE OUTLINE

Overview • Description of LEED certification process and

certification levels.

Credit Summaries & Recommendations • Descriptions of strategies and associated costs

to achieve LEED credits in each of the LEED NC- 2.2 Rating System categories: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materi- als & Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, and Innovation in Design.

Sample Scorecards • Sample scorecards for three SGEC

certification scenarios: two at Gold level and one at Platinum.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: CONSULTANT NARRATIVES


PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The South Gate Educational Center (SGEC) is located in the City of South Gate between Southern Pacific Railroad to the north, Santa Fe Avenue to the east, Firestone Boulevard to the south, and an existing industrial establishment to the west. The site is 18.5 acres, and has four two-to-four story buildings, truck yards and surface parking lots. The SGEC project consists of demolition of existing Buildings 1,3 & 4, and construction of a new 3-story classroom/office building, new parking structure (six levels above ground, one level below) and new surface parking, internal roadways, and open space.

EASEMENTS

There are currently ten (10) easements associated with the project site. See below for the description of the easements:

1 64.0’ and variable width easement to the City of South Gate for utility purposes per Parcel Map No. 40, Book 165, Pages 70 to 75, of Parcel Maps, of which only 32.0’ of the easement falls within South Gate Educational Center parcel.

2 Variable width easement for street purposes recorded 06-06-1986 as Instrument No. 86-710942, O.R., located at the west.

PREPARED BY: KPFF

6080 Center Drive, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045

Tricia Johns, P.E.,Principal [email protected]

Shahrzad Bigonah, P.E. [email protected]

3 6.0’ wide underground utility easement recorded 05-06-1982 Instrument No. 82-469199, O.R., located at the west.

4 Easement for electrical substation recorded 08-10-1955 Instrument No. 3350, O.R., located at the west.

5 6.0’ wide public utility easement recorded 01-17-1983 as Instrument No. 83-63991, O.R. which turns into 12.0’ when terminates.

6 10.0’ wide easement for pipelines recorded 11-10-1950 Instrument No. 2520, O.R. located at the northwest.

7 12.0’ wide easement for underground utility purposes recorded 07-15-1983 as Instrument No. 83- 805439, O.R. located at the east.

8 13.0’ wide underground utility easement recorded 09-29-1983 as Instrument No. 83-1149996, O.R. located at the south.

9 Easement for pole lines recorded 08-10- 1955 as Instrument No. 3350, O.R.

10 6.0’ wide underground utility easement recorded 10-13-1982 as Instrument No. 82-1030298, O.R.

See Exhibit 1 for the existing easement locations and alignments.

EXHIBIT 1. EXISTING EASEMENTS EXHIBIT PER MOLLENHAUER GROUP SURVEY DATED 05-19-2010 (FOR REFERENCE ONLY)

CIVIL REPORT: EASEMENTS


• Sub-tributary E and F: Located at the east side of the property and currently designated as a loading area.

• Sub-tributary G and H: Located at the south-

east corner of the property and currently designated as a vehicular parking and loading area.

• Sub-tributary I: Existing Building 2 (to re-

main).

• Sub-tributary J: Existing Buildings 1 and 3 (to be demolished).

• Sub-tributary K: Existing Building 4 (to be de-

molished).

The hydrology analysis performed for the SGEC shows that the campus generates peak flows of

2.98 and 2.58 cfs/acre during storm events of 50 and 25 year frequency.

EXHIBIT 2. EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM

DESCRIPTION AND OBSERVATIONS

The boundary of the South Gate Educational Center encompasses an area of 18.5 acres. The majority of surface area is impermeable (asphalt, concrete and buildings).

Based on our site visit and the topographic survey provided by the college, the campus’ hydrologic boundary and sub-tributary areas are established as indicated on Exhibit 2.

Eleven main hydrologic sub-tributary areas are established:

• Sub-tributary areas A, B and C: Located at

the northwest corner of the property and currently designated as a loading area.

• Sub-tributary D: Located at the west side of

the property, currently designated a driveway.

Exhibit 2 shows the hydrologic analysis performed on 50 and 25 year storm events based on the Los Angeles County Modified Rational Method and the mitigated volume of storm water (Vm) to be treated and infiltrated (if feasible) to comply with the California Water Resources Storm Water Quality Control Board.

The storm water runoff generated by the site is discharged to the County of Los Angeles 36” storm drain line on Santa Fe Avenue and 42” storm drain line on South Gate Boulevard. The runoff generated by sub- tributary area A-D sheet flows to existing valley gutter and catch basins and discharges to an existing County of Los Angeles 42” storm drain line on Firestone Boulevard. The runoff generated by sub-tributary E-F sheet flows to County of Los Angeles (off-site) side opening catch basins on Santa Fe Avenue. The runoff generated by sub-tributary area G-H sheet flows to County of Los Angeles (off-site) side opening catch basins on Firestone Boulevard. The runoff generated by sub-tributary I-K is channelized from buildings to underground storm drain system (further investigation will be required during the design phase).

CIVIL REPORT: STORM WATER


RECOMMENDATIONS EXISTING ROOF DRAINS AND ON-SITE STORM DRAIN PIPES

We recommend that the Design/Build team remove and cap all the existing Building 4 roof drains (after the locations are verified in field) and remove any portion of existing on-site storm drain pipes which may interfere with the new building and parking structure construction.

STORM WATER TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS

Land development and construction activities have the potential to significantly alter drainage and runoff fl ow rates/volumes, and contribute pollutants to urban runoff. During construction, erosion and removal of existing soils and vegetation can impact downstream conditions. After construction, impervious surfaces created by buildings, site pavements, roads, and parking lots prevent storm water from directly perco- lating into the soil, and create increased in-flows and potential adverse impacts to water quality.

With growing concerns about urban storm water pollution, Federal and State regulations require projects to implement controls that treat polluted runoff and control discharge rates. The Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) and City of South Gate requirements need to be met for South Gate Educational Center project.

LACCD requires implementing a storm water management plan that reduces impervious cover, promotes infiltration, and captures and treats the storm water

runoff from 90% of the average annual rainfall using acceptable best management practices (BMPs). BMPs used to treat runoff must be capable of removing 80% of the average annual post development total suspended solids (TSS) load based on existing monitoring reports.

Also, LACCD has mandated that no storm water shall leave the campus; it must be collected and stored for re-use or infiltration on-site (if feasible). They recommend reduction in the amount of impervious area as a most effective method to minimize the storm water runoff volume as well as using pervious paving materials and/or open grid paving (depending on soils percolation rate), storm water harvesting for reuse in irrigation and/or buildings, green roofs, bioswales/ vegetated filter strips, and retention ponds. Refer to LACCD Sustainable Design Standards, May 2009 Edition, for more details.

In addition, the State Water Resources Control Board has adopted the National Pollutant Discharge Elimi- nation System (NPDES) Permit for all California Boards and Los Angeles County has adopted Low Impact Design (LID), which affects the South Gate Educational Center project. LID requires all large scale nonresidential development projects to prioritize selection of BMPs to treat storm water pollutants, reduce storm water runoff volume, and promote groundwater infiltration (if feasible) and storm water reuse in an integrated approach to protecting water quality and managing water resources. Refer to the Los Angeles County Low Impact Development Standards Manual for more details.

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) SELECTION

A soils report was done on for the project by Byer Geotechnical, Inc., dated January 28, 2011. Fill soils of varying depths were encountered on site. Natural alluvium underlies the project site, the upper 10 to 17 feet of which consists of sand; below that the alluvium consists of stratified layers of sandy silt, silty clay, clay, clayey sand and sand to an approximate depth of 47 feet below grade. Below that, the alluvium consists of sand. Byer conducted an in situ percolation test on November 11, 2010 and determined that the percolation rate of the upper soils is expected to range from 292 to 436 inches per hour. Based on these results, infi ltration trenches or bioswales or drywells can be implemented for storm water treatment and infi ltration at upper level of soil.

It is recommended by the geotechnical engineer that the proposed location of the infiltration system be advanced below the existing future fi ll. It is also recommended that the infiltration system be set back at least 10 feet from adjacent private property boundar- ies and at least 20 feet from structural foundations or retaining/basement walls. A geotechnical engineer should review the fi nal plans to verify the location and design of the infi ltration system. If percolation rates vary from the report, and infiltration is determined to be not feasible by the geotechnical and civil engineer, then implementation of hard bottom planter boxes or bioswales is recommended.

CONNECTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY STORM DRAIN PIPES

The existing storm drain pipes are likely to be in bad shape considering their age, and very likely there will be a lot of conflict between the location of existing lines and new buildings. Therefore, we recommend the De- sign/Build Team bring new storm drain pipe connections onto the site from LACDPW storm drain lines on Santa Fe Avenue and Firestone Boulevard. New pipe connection permits need to be obtained from Los Angeles County Department of Public Works.

Based on the Q allowable provided by LACDPW, only 9 acres of the site stormwater runoff can be discharged to the 36” line on Santa Fe Avenue with Q allowable of 1.67 cfs/acre. See Exhibit SD.1. The rest of the site stormwater runoff can discharge to the 42” storm drain line of Firestone Boulevard (if hydrauli- cally feasible) with Q allowable of 1.00 cfs/acre. See Exhibit SD.2.

Storm drain system shall be designed in conformance with latest LACCD design guide, May 2009 Edition.



COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Office Use Only

DESIGN DIVISION 0 Sent Initials: Hydraulic Analysis Unit 0 Fax tx( Email 0 Other:

Date: Time: OFFICIAL RECORD DOCUMENT LOS ANGELES COUNTY

Issued By. 1E, - IANkm-"-- DE ARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Date v° /

t / 40 DES N DIVISION -- HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS UNIT

Public Service That Works INFORMATION REQUEST SUMMARY

INFORMATION REQUESTED BY

Requester's Name:Shahrzad Bigonah Company: KPFF Phone Number: 310-665-2800 Fax Number: 310-850-8279 Email: sbi g onah •JkIff-la.com

Method of Contact: 0 Walk-in Phone Fax IX] Email Prelim. Mtg. Date: 10/12/10 D j J LI

Intended Use: Planing

Proposed Project Type: Educational Acreage Involved: 18.7

Will information be used in any litigation? YES NO Case Info Name: No: Location:

Requester's Signature:

INFORMATION REQUESTED (Attach site map if available) LACFCD Facility: Name: Santa Fe Ave. Drain

Unit: Line: Firestone BLVD. to Palm PL. Station: 1+00 to 7+06 •

City: South Gate Street/Cross-street Firestone Blvd and Independence Ave.

Thomas Guide: Page: 702 Grid: H-3 and J-3 Site Map/Plans Submitted Info. Requested: Q allowable

Hydrologic Data, Hydraulic Calculation Desig n Capacity

BELOW SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY THE HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS UNIT

INFORMATION PROVIDED: 0 q Oço 4, tako.,...4A__9_

O7 I o czc

REFERENCES SEARCHED:

COMMENTS, ETC:

FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED:

INFORMATION PROVIDED BY: Date: ° 1 1 41 tO

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DESIGN DIVISION Office Use Only

Hydraulic Analysis Unit ID Sent initials:

OFFICIAL O Fax Email 0 Other: RECORD DOCUMENT Date: Time:

LOS ANGELES COUNTY Issued By: s_ PARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Date* tO / 1 0

ES1 GN DIVISION — HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS UNIT Public Service That Works

INFORMATION REQUEST SUMMARY

INFORMATION REQUESTED BY Requester's Name:Shahrzad Bigonah Company: KPFF Phone Number: 310-665-2800 Fax Number: 310-850-8279 Email: sbigonahkpff-la.com

Method of Contact: ID Walk-in 0 Phone LII Fax Ej Email El Prelim. Mtg. Date: 10/14/10

Intended Use: Planing

Proposed Project Type: Educational Acreage Involved: 18.7

Will information be used in any litigation? Q YES El NO Case Info Name: No: Location:

Requester's Signature:

INFORMATION REQUE ED (Attach site map if available)

LACFCD Facility: Name: Firestone Drain Project ID 7801 Unit Line: Alameda to Santa Fe

Station: 1+00 to 7+06 City: South Gate

Street/Cross-street Firestone Blvd and Inde pendence Ave. Thomas Guide: Page: 702 Grid: H-3 and J-3 El Site Map/Plans Submitted

Info. Requested: Q allowable Hydrologic Data, Hydraulic Calculation Desig n Capacity

BELOW SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY THE HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS UNIT

INFORMATION PROVIDED: H t • 00 C' I tO

%-k Q. I— 2.r1

(;) z.,‘ 3C--+ 4 0 kt+. N/ok- C A )

REFERENCES SEARCHED:

COMMENTS, ETC:

FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED:

INFORMATION PROVIDED BY: Date: 10 1 11 to

EXHIBIT SD.2 FIRESTONE BLVD. Q ALLOWABLE EXHIBIT SD.1 SANTA FE AVE Q ALLOWABLE



EXHIBIT 3. EXISTING SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM


There are four (4) sewer lateral connections serving South Gate Educational Center and HON site. Three (3) lateral connections are on Santa Fe Avenue and one (1) lateral connection is on Fires- tone Boulevard (See Exhibit ).

All of existing Building 1 and the majority of existing Building 3 sewage discharges to the City of South Gate existing 15” Vitrified Clay Pipe

(VCP) line by two 12” VCP laterals, for conveyance to the District’s Mountain View-Belle Ver-

non Relief Extension Trunk Sewer, located in Truba Avenue at Missouri Avenue. The

sewage from the showers and washroom located at the northwest corner of Build-

ing 3 and the sewage generated by existing Building 4 discharge to existing

City of South Gate 15” VCP line by a 16” VCP lateral, for conveyance

to the District’s Mountain View- Belle Vernon Relief Extension

Trunk Sewer, located in Truba Avenue at Missouri Avenue. The 18-inch diameter Moun- tain view-Belle Vernon Relief Trunk Sewer has a design capacity of 1.9 million gallon per day (GPD) and conveyed peak flow of 1.3 million GPD when last measured in 2009.

The sewage generated by the western part of the campus and the washroom located at the northwest corner of Building 3 discharges to 21” pipe by a privately maintained 18” VCP sanitary sewer pipe running parallel to Calden Avenue for conveyance to the Los Angeles County Sanitation District Alameda Street Extension Trunk Sewer, located in a right-of-way east of railroad tracks just north of Southern Avenue. The 21-inch diameter Alameda Street Extension Trunk Sewer has a design capacity of 5.4 Million GPD and conveyed peak flow of 1.1 million GPD when last measured in 2004.

Wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant located in the City of Carson, which has a design capacity of 400 Million GPD and currently process an average of 280.5 Million GPD.

The total sewage generated by maximum estimated 9,000 students will be about 180,000 Gallons per Day (167 gpm), according to Los Angeles San- itation District Table 1 (See Exhibit SS.1). Loading for each Class of Land Use (20 Gallon Per Day per Student), which is equal to 666 Fixture Unit.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed new building setting will impact the sewer system at the north side of the project. We recommend the design build team remove all the sewer pipes and appurtenances at the north side of the project and provide a temporary cap at the 16” lateral located on Santa Fe Avenue for future connection. The existing 16” sanitary sewer lateral seems to have a high capacity (more than what is expected for the proposed new building); we recommend the design build team re-size the lateral based on New Building demand with minimum 2 ft/s velocity at 2.0% slope and 50% full flow and obtain a connection permit from City of South Gate.

The sanitary sewer system shall be designed in conformance with the latest LACCD design guidelines.

CIVIL REPORT: SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM

Existing Sanitary Sewer System Capacity Size Street Location Capacity at 1%

Slope Capacity at 2% Slope

16” Santa Fe Avenue 592 ft N of Firestone

>8,300 >8,300


6,560 8,200


6,560 8,200

18” Firestone Boulevard

1,338 ft E of Santa Fe

>8,300 >8,300


TABLE 1

LOADINGS FOR EACH CLASS OF LAND USE

DESCRIPTION UNIT OF MEASURE

FLOW (Gallons Per Day)

COD (Pounds Per Day)

SUSPENDED

SOLIDS (Pounds Per Day)

R E S I D E N T I A L Single Family Home

Parcel

260

1.22

0.59Duplex Parcel 312 1.46 0.70Triplex Parcel 468 2.19 1.05Fourplex Parcel 624 2.92 1.40Condominiums Parcel 195 0.92 0.44Single Family Home Parcel 156 0.73 0.35(reduced rate)

Five Units or More

No. of Dwlg. Units

156

0.73

0.35Mobile Home Parks No. of Spaces 156 0.73 0.35

EXHIBIT SS.1

CIVIL REPORT: SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM

C O M M E R C I A L Hotel/Motel/Rooming House

Room

125

0.54

0.28Store 1000 ft2

100 0.43 0.23Supermarket 1000 ft2

150 2.00 1.00Shopping Center 1000 ft2

325 3.00 1.17Regional Mall 1000 ft2

150 2.10 0.77Office Building 1000 ft2

200 0.86 0.45Professional Building 1000 ft2

300 1.29 0.68Restaurant 1000 ft2

1,000 16.68 5.00Indoor Theatre 1000 ft2

125 0.54 0.28Car Wash Tunnel - No Recycling

1000 ft2

3,700

15.86

8.33

Tunnel - Recycling 1000 ft2 2,700 11.74 6.16

Wand 1000 ft2 700 3.00 1.58

Financial Institution 1000 ft2 100 0.43 0.23

Service Shop 1000 ft2 100 0.43 0.23

Animal Kennels 1000 ft2 100 0.43 0.23

Service Station 1000 ft2 100 0.43 0.23

Auto Sales/Repair 1000 ft2 100 0.43 0.23

Wholesale Outlet 1000 ft2 100 0.43 0.23

Nursery/Greenhouse 1000 ft2 25 0.11 0.06

Manufacturing 1000 ft2 200 1.86 0.70

Dry Manufacturing 1000 ft2 25 0.23 0.09

Lumber Yard 1000 ft2 25 0.23 0.09

Warehousing 1000 ft2 25 0.23 0.09

Open Storage 1000 ft2 25 0.23 0.09

Drive-in Theatre 1000 ft2 20 0.09 0.05



There are two 2” domestic water meters and one 8” fi re service meter located on Firestone Boulevard. Based on the information obtained from the City of South Gate for fi re fl ow availability, the hydrant located at the northeast corner of the site on Santa Fe Av- enue has a residual pressure of 42 PSI and fl ow rate of 2,648 gpm at 20 PSI, and the hydrant at the southwest corner of the site on Firestone Boulevard has a residual pressure of 45 PSI and fl ow rate of 2,307 gpm at 20 PSI. See Exhibit FW.1 for the existing fi re fl ow and pressure information provided by the City of South Gate.

There are currently seven on-site fi re hydrants. Two of them are associated with new building construction. There are three off-site hydrants, one on Santa Fe Avenue and two on Firestone Boulevard. See Figure FW.1 for the existing fi re fl ow and pressure provided by the City of South Gate.

There is a backfl ow preventer device located at the southwest of property with connection to the fi re service room. Based on visual observation, there appear

to be several fi re hose connections on the west side of the room and a pressure reducing valve located at the south side of existing Building 1.

According to the on-site water as-built plan received from the city of South Gate, it appears that there was a water tower at the northwest corner of the site which has been removed previously. How or why it was abandoned is not clear; there is no record on how abandonment was accomplished. What appeared to be a water well head and partial support structure were found during Anderson En- vironmental’s exploration which likely used to feed the water tower.

RECOMMENDATIONS

No utilities shall be located under new building and parking structure; existing utilities that fall within new building footprints shall be relocated as required. The future Design-Build Team is responsible for complete removal of the well structure and all appurtenances and coordination with the city.

Existing on-site fi re hydrants that are located within the driveway area shall be relocated as required. No fi re hydrant should be located within the vehicular and pedestrian access areas.

New fi re service should be installed to serve new building. It is anticipated that this line (minimum 6”) would be fed from the existing City water main on Santa Fe Avenue. Hydraulic calculations for fi re fl ow by a Cali- fornia Licensed Professional Engineer should be performed to ascertain if a fi re sprinkler pump is required. If it is, provisions for pump housing, tank and electrical requirements shall be provided.

Approvals need to be obtained from the Local Fire De- partment (City of South Gate) for fi re fl ow, site access, dispersal areas, and on-site fi re hydrants.

The domestic water and fi re water distribution system shall be designed in conformance with LACCD latest design guide.

EXHIBIT 4. EXISTING DOMESTIC AND FIRE WATER SYSTEMS

CIVIL REPORT: WAT ER SYSTEMS


EXHIBIT FW.1

CIVIL REPORT: WAT ER SYSTEMS


HVAC GOVERNING CODES AND STANDARDS

The HVAC design will comply with all current applicable codes and standards, including those listed

below: Codes-Use the Most Current 1. 2007 California Building Code based on the 2006 International Building Code (IBC), with City of

Los Angeles Amendments. 2. 2007 California Mechanical Code based on the 2006 Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC), with City of

Los Angeles Amendments. 3. 2007 California Energy Code based on Title 24, Part 6, 2005 standards. 4. Americans with Disability Act (ADA)

HVAC DESIGN CRITERIA

OUTDOOR DESIGN CRITERIA – SOUTH GATE, CALIFORNIA

PREPARED BY: GLUMAC

617 W. 7th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90017-3830

Edwin Lee, P.E., Managing Principal [email protected]

Standards 1. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)

• Handbooks: Fundamentals, Applications, Systems and Equipment • Standard 15: Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration • Standard 52: Gravimetric and Dust – Spot Procedures for Testing Air-Cleaning Devices Used

in General Ventilation for Removing Particulate Matter • Standard 55: Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy • Standard 62: Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality • Standard 90.1: Energy Effi cient Design of New Buildings except Low Rise Residential Buildings • Standard 105: Standard Method of Measuring and Expressing Building Energy Performance • Standard 111: Practices for Measurement, Testing, Adjusting and Balancing of Building HVAC

& Refrigeration • Standard 114: Energy Management Control Systems Instrumentation • Standard 135: BACnet a Data Communication Protocol for Building Automation and

Control Networks 2. Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standards 3. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standards

• NFPA 90A – Installation of Air Conditioning and Ventilating Systems • NFPA 92A – Smoke-Control Systems • NFPA 96 – Ventilation and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations • NFPA 101 – Life Safety Code

4. Air Moving and Conditioning Association (AMCA) Standards 5. Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association (SMACNA) 6. Occupational Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, 29 CFR, Parts 1926 and 1910 7. Environmental Protection Agency Regulations 8. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) publications

INDOOR DESIGN CRITERIA Indoor Design Conditions 1. Cooling: 75°F +/-2°F 2. Heating: 70°F +/-2°F 3. Exceptions:

• Kitchen: Cooling 80°F +/-2°F • Locker Rooms: Cooling 78°F +/-2°F • Electrical Rooms: Cooling Only 85°F +/-2°F. • Data Rooms: Cooling Only 72°F +/-2°F. • Elevator Machine Rooms: Cooling Only

85°F +/-2°F or per the Elevator Manufacturer requirements.

VENTILATION CRITERIA 1. Per ASHRAE Standard 62 and Title 24, which-

ever value is greater. 2. Demand Control Ventilation as prescribed by ap-

plicable standards and occupancy densities. 3. Exhaust to outdoors:

• Type I grease exhaust for concession area and outside vendor food service spaces.

• Restrooms and Lockers: 12-15 air changes per hour.

• High Volume Copy Rooms: Dedicated exhaust and supply to maintain negative pressure in copy room in relation to the adjoining spaces.

• Large Storage and Equipment Areas: 0.25 CFM per square foot of fl oor area.

BUILDING ENVELOPE In order to meet the project’s energy conservation goals, Title 24 minimum requirements are to be exceeded by 24%, the minimum energy requirement mandated by LACCD and implemented in all current LACCD projects.

Internal Heat Gain 1. Lighting:

• Per Title 24 maximum allowed values based on occupancy

2. Receptacle power: • Per ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook – Chapter 30 (Nonresidential Cooling and Heating Load Calculation Procedures)

3. Occupants: • 250 Btu/hr sensible and 200 Btu/hr latent

4. Electrical Transformers: Per manufacturer data for high effi ciency transformers

5. Data Rooms: Per recommended values from electrical engineer

6. Occupancy criteria for ventilation based on ANSI/ ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007: • Offi ce Area: 1 person/100 sq. ft. • Lobby: 1 person/100 sq. ft. • Classroom / Conference Room: 1 person/

20 sq. ft. or based on seating capacity • Dining Area: 1 person/10 sq. ft. or based on

seating capacity

Outdoor temperatures for a typical year (source: EnergyPlus Weather Data)

AIR DISTRIBUTION DESIGN CRITERIA 1. All ductwork: 0.08” w.g./100 ft. max 2. Overhead Air Distribution System

• 1500 fpm max above ceiling • 2000 fpm max in shaft

3. Return Velocity: 1500 fpm max 4. Exhaust Velocity: 1500 fpm max 5. Grease Exhaust Velocity: 1500-2000 fpm

PIPEWORK DESIGN CRITERIA 1. Max Pressure Drop: 3 ft. w.g. / 100 ft. 2. Max Velocity: 5 ft/sec in occupied areas and 8 ft/

sec in Mechanical Rooms

CENTRAL PLANT SYSTEMS TEMPERATURES 1. Recommended Chilled Water

• Entering water temperature: 42°F • Leaving water temperature: 58°F

2. Recommended Heating Water • Entering water temperature: 180°F • Leaving water temperature: 140°F

This campus is intended to incorporate, as much as possible, sustainable MEP design features into the project and integrate with the overall buildings design to achieve the most sustainable design approach.

MEP STRATEGIES: MECHANICAL DESIGN


HVAC SYSTEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY DESIGN BUILD TEAM

RADIANT FLOOR SYSTEM Traditionally, radiant fl oors have been used primarily for heating in the winter. Radiant fl oor heating turns the fl oor into a large, low temperature radiator and warms all the surfaces of a room. These surfaces surround a person with warmth. Recently, cooling with radiant fl oors has increased in popularity. Radiant fl oor cooling operates on the same principal as radiant fl oor heating, with the heat fl ow in reverse.

Radiant fl oors may consist of PEX tubing built into the fl oor construction. The tubing carries heating hot water or chilled water to heat/cool the fl oor, which in turn heats/cools the rest of the room. The tubing can

does not occur during all operating conditions. The radiant fl oor system would be ideal for Building 1.

OTHER SYSTEMS It is recommended that the new building have fl oor mounted VAV indoor air handlers with chilled water coils for cooling and VAV terminal boxes with heating hot water reheat coils for heating. Some of the large indoor air handlers will require heating coils in the air handler, such as those with extended operating hours or 100% outside air system. Air handling units with UV lamps provide better indoor air quality. The condensate water can be piped to a collection tank

BASEMENT PRE-COOLING/HEATING SYSTEM This concept involves routing air through a basement to achieve cooling or heating depending on ambient air conditions. Such a precCooling/heating system can reduce the mechanical cooling/heating load. Earth temperatures and, consequently, pre-cooling performance vary signifi cantly from sunny to shady locations. Where possible, inlets should be placed in shady areas. There is no simple formula for determin- ing the amount of pre-cooling desired. The pre-cooling will be even more effective if the duct can be bur- ied and installed underground. Local soil conditions, soil moisture, and other site-specifi c factors should be considered to determine the amount of pre-cooling. The ground temperature in South Gate (Climate zone 8) is about 58-68 °F at a depth of 6 feet and 59-66 °F at a depth of 13 feet.

RADIANT COMFORT Radiant systems work by controlling the amount of heat an occupant loses. If occupants lose too much heat, they will feel cold; losing too little heat makes a person feel hot. The average person feels comfortable when they lose 450 BTU/hr while performing typical indoor activities. This heat loss equals the heat generated by the body, producing a state of equilibrium. Some 45-50% of the heat loss is through radiation to surrounding surfaces, 30-35% through

convection to the air, and 20% through evaporation (breathing, sweating). By controlling the surrounding surface temperatures, radiant fl oors have a large impact on personal heat loss and comfort.

In a typical conditioned indoor environment, the surrounding surfaces (walls, ceilings, etc) are at room temperature, and humidity is within an acceptable range, so controlling the air temperature is the sole variable in a person’s comfort. In this situation, the comfort temperature is equal to the air temperature. That is, when the air temperature is 70°F, the person feels like it is 70°F.

However, in spaces with large areas of external glazing, the glass surfaces can become hot in the summer and cold in the winter. With a typical all-air HVAC system, the room air temperature needs to be lowered (in the summer) or increased (in the winter) to com-

pensate for the radiant effects of the glass. Therefore, radiant fl oor heating and cooling use less energy in comparison to common forced air overhead systems. In cooling mode, the cool radiant fl oor counteracts the warm radiation of windows. This eliminates the need to overcool the air to compensate for the warm radiation, thereby saving energy. Similarly for heating, a radiant fl oor allows for comfort at a lower room air temperature, which reduces energy consumption.

In addition to the energy savings due to setback air temperatures, radiant systems use water instead of air, a much more effi cient means to transport energy. About half the energy savings associated with radiant systems is due to reduced fan power requirements.

Radiant fl oor for cooling and heating

be embedded in a concrete topping slab. This layer of concrete acts as an excellent heat storage device, stabilizing the space temperature. A layer of rigid

foam insulation is required under the radiant slabs. An insulation thickness of 4” is recommended.

In cooling mode, condensation on radiant fl oors is a consideration. During the design process, a fi nite element analysis model will be used to calculate the heat transfer and temperature distribution through the fl oor. The cooling output of the fl oor will be determined for a surface temperature that is above the design dew- point, so that cooling output and thermal comfort will be known for the design conditions and condensation will not occur. The HVAC controls system will incorporate humidity sensors, fl oor surface temperature sensors, and controls logic to ensure that condensation

and recycled for cooling tower make up.

Indoor VAV air handler

Pex radiant fl oor construction

MEP STRATEGIES: MECHANICAL DESIGN


ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY DESIGN BUILD TEAM

The electrical design must comply with the most recent editions of all applicable codes and standards, including those listed below:

Codes 1. California Building Code based on the International

Building Code, with City of Los Angeles Amendments.2. California Electrical Code based on the National Electri-

cal Code, with City of Los Angeles Amendments.3. California Energy Code based on Title 24, Part 6.4. Americans with Disability Act (ADA)

Standards 1. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standards

• NFPA 101 – Life Safety Code2. Underwriters Laboratory (UL)3. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES-

NA)4. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)5. American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

INCOMING SERVICE The existing site plan shows a number of transformers located around the existing buildings on or close to existing underground utility easements. Therefore, any new power supply to new buildings will need to be obtained from SCE.

There are at least two existing transformers located on the site currently serving Building 1. There is an existing transformer feeding Building 3. It is recommended that the Design-Build Team determine the power load requirements for the new SGEC Building and parking structure based on the new program and determine if the existing incoming services to these buildings are adequate. If the power demand exceeds the existing capacity, a new service will be required from SCE.

The locations of the electrical utility equipment and easements are identifi ed on Exhibit 1: Existing Site Utilities (page A16).

As the exact details (service voltage, feeder locations, etc.) are unknown, there are two options which should

be considered for the new building power supply:

Option # 1: Assuming there is adequate power for the new buildings from the SCE service at 480Y/277V, 3 phase, 4 wires, the existing main switchboard should be replaced with a new switchboard of equal capacity and size for the new project.

Option # 2: Assuming there is an inadequate power for the new buildings, a new power supply should be part of the site electrical infrastructure. The site electrical infrastructure should not be formed as part of the new building. A separate site electrical infrastructure should cover the power supply upgrade from SCE and distribute the power to the new buildings. It is as- sumed that the new service to the renovated building will be rated at 480Y/277V, 3 phase, 4 wires.

POWER DISTRIBUTION FOR NEW SGEC BUILDING All the panel boards should be designed with 42 circuits and a main breaker.

Dry type step down transformers should be provided for the 208Y/120V power and located at strategic locations throughout the fi rst fl oor and on second fl oor. A 208Y/120V, 3 phase, 4 wires distribution board with ground bus should be provided in each location to feed the 208Y/120V panel boards. All the equipment should be located in the electrical room.

Dedicated panel boards should be provided at strategic locations for lighting with lighting control panels.

Dedicated distribution boards should be provided in mechanical rooms for power feeders to mechanical and plumbing equipment.

POWER DISTRIBUTION FOR NEW PARKING STRUCTURE All the panel boards should be designed with 42 circuits and a main breaker.

Dedicated panel boards should be provided at strategic locations for lighting with lighting control panels.

Dedicated distribution boards should be provided in mechanical rooms for power feeders to mechanical and plumbing equipment.

High-effi ciency electrical distribution products are recommended, including transformers, generators, and any heat-producing electrical equipment.

MEASUREMENT Digital metering should be provided for new building and parking structure power consumption. Additional meters should be provided to meter the power consumption of lighting and HVAC panels. Net metering should be provided for interconnecting on-site generation from any photovoltaic panels. Additional, customer-owned load monitoring should be provided and interfaced with the site building management system (BMS).

EMERGENCY POWER Emergency generators using ultra low sulphur diesel fuel should be provided for emergency power to this facility. Generators should be located adjacent to the buildings, and have an integral under frame tank for fuel storage. The generators should be rated for the building voltage. The following is a preliminary list of equipment that is anticipated to have emergency power requirements:

• Emergency elevators

• Egress lighting (hallways, common areasand spaces with high occupancy)

• Exit signs

• Fire alarm system

• Power and cooling systems for the serverroom, UPS/battery room and IDF rooms

• Power systems for critical control and communication equipment (e.g. server & IDF rooms)

LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROL The lighting levels should be designed in accordance with Illuminating Engineers Society (IES) standards and the lighting power density in accordance with the California Energy Code. The lighting system shall exceed Title 24 energy standards by 20%. Besides compact fl uorescent lamps with direct and indirect luminaries, other advanced light sources such as LED lights should be considered in the lighting design. LED lights have several advantages such as low energy power and extended lamp life as well as high lighting quality. Incandescent lighting is not recommended due to low energy effi ciency.

The lighting control package should include such provisions as dual technology occupancy sensors, photocells, timers, over-ride switches and central lighting control systems. Dual technology occupancy sensors should be designed for offi ces, conference rooms, work rooms, work areas and restrooms. Daylight harvesting controls with photocells should be integrated and placed in areas such as classrooms and open offi ce areas where an appreciable amount of daylight

will enter. These spaces should have automatic controls to dim the lights to a given level. Offi ce areas should be designed so that occupants can have individual control of their desk lighting. Daylight should be incorporated into designs as much as possible, including the use of light louvres, glazing, skylights, etc.

A low-voltage lighting control system should be incorporated to provided the following functions:

• Time clock auto-off function for open offi cesand common areas

• Photocell-on and time clock-off function forexterior lighting

• Daylight harvesting controls for dimminglight fi xtures when daylight is available.

• Peak demand auto load-shedding by dim- ming light fi xtures as described above.

Exterior lighting should include only full cutoff fi xtures which prevent upward light that causes light pollution. In addition, exterior lighting should be placed to avoid excessive light trespass behind the project boundary. High mercury content HID fi xture such as metal halide should not be included in the lighting package.

Parking structure lighting should be LED type and controlled via an occupancy sensor.

Transformers Fire Alarm System

MEP STRATEGIES: ELECTRICAL DESIGN


PLUMBING SYSTEMS TO BE CONSIDERED BY DESIGN-BUILD TEAM

TELEPHONE AND DATA A complete telephone and data system should be designed for the building in accordance with LACCD telecom standards and should include, but not be limited to the following elements: conduits, back boxes, cable trays, data cables, patch panels, routers, and fi le servers. Desktop computers should not be included in the scope of the telecom design. Cable trays should be included as necessary, terminating at the telecommunication room.

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM The system should be designed based upon the occupancy of each individual building and should be submitted to DSA for review and approval. Each control panel should be provided with emergency battery backup. The initiating devices should be in- dividually addressable and include smoke detectors, duct detectors, beam detectors, manual pull stations and monitor modules for the sprinkler water fl ow and sprinkler tamper switches. Elevators and elevator vestibules should be interfaced to the fi re alarm system for release of magnetic door holders and elevator capture upon fi re alarm condition. The fi re alarm system should be equipped with suffi cient relays and monitor modules to properly interface with the emergency mechanical equipment. The fi re alarm system should also provide monitor input points for status of the emergency generators.

MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT CONNECTIONS Connections should be made for all mechanical equipment. All motors 1/2 hp and larger should be wired for 480 volt, 3 phase power. Motors less than 1/2 hp should be wired for 120 volt, 1 phase power. Where there is a large concentration of motors (greater than six motors within one room with across the line start- ers), Motor Control Centers should be provided.

SECURITY SYSTEM Security systems should be provided for each building as necessary. The electrical infrastructure should outline provisions for security stations, card readers, security cameras, and other necessary equipment per LACCD standards.

PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS Photovoltaic cells consist of thin semiconductor plates that convert light energy into electrical energy. The electrical energy is converted by a transformer and in- verter, and utilized for building power. The connection to the main switchboard is in parallel with the utility electrical service, and so the utility continuously provides all power in excess of what is produced by the photo-voltaic system. Conversely, the utility company (SCE) purchases all surplus power produced by the photovoltaic system.

Locations on the site that may be feasible for solar panel arrays include:

• Mounted on the east side roof of the new building facing south.

• Mounted on the roof of the parking structure facing south.

Photovoltaic Panels

The plumbing and fi re protection design must comply with the most recent editions of all applicable codes and standards, including:

Codes 1. California Building Code based on the International

Building Code, with City of Los Angeles Amendments. 2. California Plumbing Code based on the Uniform Plumb-

ing Code, with City of Los Angeles Amendments. 3. California Fire Code based on the International Fire

Code (IFC), with City of Los Angeles Amendments. 4. Americans with Disability Act (ADA)

Standards National Fire Protection Association Standards

• NFPA 13 – Installation of Sprinkler Systems • NFPA 14 – Standpipes and Hose Systems • NFPA 92A – Smoke-Control Systems • NFPA 96 – Ventilation and Fire Protection of Com-

mercial Cooking Operations • NFPA 101 – Life Safety Code

DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE Domestic water service from the local utility would serve the project. A 4” to 6” water main with double check valve on the incoming service should be provided for the building. Water hammer arresters should be located at all banks of fi xtures as well as at all locations where fast closing valves are located. Domestic water may be extended to irrigation systems and hose bibs with backfl ow prevention devices as required.

The California Plumbing Code requires the maximum pressure at plumbing fi xtures to be 80 psi, the minito be 25 psi. We recommend the pressures be limited to a maximum of 75 psi and a minimum of 30 psi.

Per project requirements, the buildings will be “double-piped” for the gray water system. That is, water closets will be supplied from a separate water distribution system and gray water will be provided to the building for fi xture fl ushing.

A 10” water main is available from Santa Fe Ave, and

a 12” water main is available on Firestone Blvd. Re- fer to Civil (Page A07. A09) and underground utilities drawings (Page A15) for details.

DOMESTIC WATER HEATING It is recommended that dedicated gas-fi red tankless water heaters be utilized. Accommodations should be made for heater fl ues and combustion air. The Ray- chem HWAT system is recommended, which deliv- ers hot water with zero waste and zero waiting. The system maintains hot water temperature utilizing self- regulating electric heating cables, a set of connection kits, and an electronic controller to provide immediate hot water at the tap without the use of a water recircu- lation system. Solar hot water system should also be considered. The domestic hot water system should be integrated into the BMS system for control.

WASTE AND VENT Connections with site utilities include multiple waste lines to serve the new building and the parking structure. There is a 16’ waste line running across the building and parking structure area. The combined sewer from the gray water system can be treated and reused for fl ushing toilets and for irrigation. Refer to Civil and underground utilities drawings for details.

RAIN WATER AND GRAY WATER SYSTEMS Rainwater collection systems store rainwater from rooftops or land surfaces to be used for toilet fl ushing, irrigation, cooling tower make up water, drinking water (after suffi cient treatment), etc. Rainwater is channeled into enclosed/covered storage via gutters and pipes. The collected water may then be treated or fi ltered and pumped back to the system.

Graywater collection system is a similar concept, but collects water from domestic activities such as laundry, dishwashing, and bathing, which needs more treatment before it can be used for irrigation and other purposes. It is not potable since it may contain bacteria and other harmful pathogens. It is collected from

the appropriate fi xtures; a separate plumbing system is required to divide the waste from black water fi x- tures, which should go directly to the sanitary sewer. Local code approval from the authority having jurisdiction is required prior to installation of the system.

Gray water can be stored under or above ground. Storage tank materials may include concrete, steel, fi berglass, plastic, etc. The tank must be structurally sound and tight cover must be provided to prevent algae and mosquito growth. Gray water should not be stored without treatment for longer than a day; un- treated, it has a high bacteria count and there is risk of it going septic. The tank must be pumped out every 3-4 years. An alternate source of potable water may be necessary to supplement gray water at times of decreased supply. Backfl ow protection is necessary on the make-up water. Treatment depends on the quality of the incoming water and owner preferences, and its success depends on the maintenance of the equipment. A gray water system includes:

• fi lters to remove sediments • chlorine or iodine to disinfect the water • aeration to replenish oxygen levels • ultraviolet treatment • reverse osmosis • ozone treatment • addition of a food-grade dye to the water to

distinguish from it potable water

Treated gray water requires periodic testing to make sure the process is operating properly. Samples are sent to an independent testing laboratory. The gray water may then be used for toilets and urinals, and for below-grade irrigation systems and cooling tower water make-up. It requires a separate plumbing system clearly marked as non-potable. Pumping systems shall provide suffi cient water pressure to fi xtures at the design fl ow rate, sized similarly to a domestic house pump system.

The design fl ow is based on the number of the people

MEP STRATEGIES: ELECTRICAL DESIGN / PLUMBING DESIGN


in the building and lavatory, shower, laundry use ver- sus toilet and urinal use. The storage tank should be large enough to hold twice the expected daily fl ow rate plus surge loads. Overfl ow is drained to the sanitary sewer, but treatment may be required to remove added chemicals before fl owing to the municipal sewer. Rain water harvested from the building storm drain system can also be reused for irrigation and toilets.

vate the fl ow of water as needed. This system does not require AC power connections or batteries.

Lavatories, water closets, urinals, and electric water coolers shall be ADA compliant. Floor drains shall be located in each restroom, and fl oor sinks/drains in all mechanical rooms and adjacent to equipment requiring drainage. All fl oor sinks/drains shall be automatically trap-primed to maintain trap seals.

NATURAL GAS Natural gas shall be provided for HVAC boilers, domestic water heaters, and other gas appliances.

PIPING AND INSULATION MATERIALS The recommended pipe and insulation specifi cations for the project are as follows:

EXISTING UTILITIES

ELECTRICAL Electrical utility equipment and easement locations are identifi ed on Exhibit 1. There are at least three existing transformers, two on the south side of the facility serving Building 1 and one serving Building 3. Electri- cal service can be obtained from these transformers, but new service will be required if power load requirements exceed their capacity. Location of new service

must be coordinated and confi rmed from SCE. There are power poles on the east side of the facility along Santa Fe Avenue and electrical easements along the south and northwest side. SCE must confi rm whether there is electrical service located along them.

PLUMBING Plumbing utility locations are identifi ed on the Exhibit

1. There is a 10” water line running along Santa Fe Avenue east of the facility and a 12” water line running next to Firestone Boulevard south of the facility. Water service can be obtained from these. There are existing sewer lines currently located around the facility. New building sewer lines can be tapped into these.

GAS There is a gas line serving Building 1 located on the

STORM WATER

Gray water system schematic

• Waste, Vent, Storm, and Overfl ow Drain: No hub cast iron pipe and fi ttings shall be utilized for soil, waste, vent, storm, and overfl ow drain piping.

• Domestic Cold and Hot Water: Type L copper with

Several storm drain lines are anticipated for connection to site utilities. Sizing for the storm drain system will be based on a rainfall rate of 4” per hour as required by California Plumbing Code. The storm drain system will be tied into the gray water system, thus diverting storm water run off that would otherwise be discharged into the public storm sewer.

PLUMBING FIXTURES AND DRAINS Water effi ciency is a major consideration in the selection of all plumbing fi xtures, with low-fl ush water closets, waterless urinals, low-fl ow lavatories and ultra- low-fl ow fi xtures as potential options.

Lavatory stations can be provided with individual infrared controls using NDITE technology in which photovoltaic cells in the top of the spray heads of two or three station lavatory systems provide power to a power storage and management system which is then distributed to the sensors and solenoid valve to acti-

soldered or brazed joints is recommended for domestic hot and cold water piping systems. The main domestic cold water risers may be Victaulic joints to accommodate shop fabrication and fi eld installation with mechanical couplings. All branch piping is expected to be fi eld installed.

• Natural Gas: Schedule 40 steel pipe, with weld- ed fi ttings, is recommended for the gas risers. Branch piping may be screwed for connection to ranges.

• Piping Insulation: Fiberglass pipe insulation is required for domestic hot water piping systems. Domestic cold water piping, condensate drain piping, storm drain and overfl ow drain piping, and roof drain bodies shall be insulated to prevent condensation.

FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS We recommend the entire facility to be protected by an automatic fi re protection system in accordance with NFPA 13 and 14.

MEP STRATEGIES: PLUMBING DESIGN / EXISTING UTILITIES

west side of the building. There are also two additionalgas lines which serve existing Buildings 2 and 3. Gas service can be obtained from these lines.

Exhibit 1: Existing Utilities

F I R E S T O N E

F I R E S T O N E B O U L E V A R D

B O U L E V A R D F I R E S T O N E B O UL E V A R D


BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS

The South Gate site today consists of four buildings (referred to in this report as Building 1, Building 2, Building 3, and Building 4). It is our understanding that currently the owner plans to demolish Buildings 1, 3 & 4 entirely, as well as the bridge, passageway, and other small structure between Buildings 4 & 3 and 1 & 2. Building 2 will be unoccupied by the college and will remain untouched except as described below.

Building 4 was constructed relatively recently, but Buildings 1-3 at the South Gate site were constructed in the late 1920’s. Although original drawings are not available, information relating to the buildings’ construction in this report has been obtained through site observation and investigation, and as-built drawings provided by East LA College from recent surveys conducted in 1998 and 2008.

Our offi ce has assisted the owner in the development of a survey and testing program to obtain accurate information relating to the buildings’ construction. The intent of this program was to obtain a comprehensive structural package outlining not only the physical information of structural elements (sizes, locations, etc.), but also to provide information related to the strength and other material properties of the different structural elements. Based on the results of limited material testing it has been determined that at several locations the concrete used in some of the construction is of low strength.

A brief description of each of the buildings follows with accompanying typical plans of each.

• Building 1 is a one-story structure that also has a large below grade basement level and a partial mezzanine level between the ground fl oor and the roof. The building is rectangular in plan and has a footprint of approximately 367 feet by 746 feet. Exist- ing construction type as observed typically consists of

concrete slabs, steel and concrete framing members, and exterior concrete walls. (Figures 1A & 1B).

• Building 2 is a three-story structure with a below grade basement level. The building is skewed in plan with a footprint of approximately 110 feet by 125 feet. The building also has an approximately 70 foot tall tower at the intersection of the wings. (Figures 2A & 2B).

• Building 3 is a four story above grade structure with a below grade basement level. The building is a long, narrow rectangle in plan and has a footprint of approximately 112 feet by 688 feet. (Figures 3A & 3B).

• Building 4 is a two story structure, trapezoi- dal in plan with a building footprint of approximately 300 feet by 440 feet. (Figures 4A & 4B)

IMPACT ON BUILDING 3

When Building 4 is demolished, an existing bridge connecting it to Building 3 will be removed. This will leave an opening in the exterior wall of Building 3. It is not expected that this will have any structural impact on the building. This opening will need to be fi lled in a manner compatible with the surrounding walls.

It is our recommendation that the owner validate our opinion with the governing agency having jurisdiction over Building 3. Please note since this building does not meet the current code requirements for use as an educational building, a fence will need to be installed to prevent the occupants of the campus from gaining access. The exact location and requirements for the design and installation of this fence will need to be discussed with DSA.

Figure 1A: Building 1 - First Floor Plan

Figure 1B: Building 1 - Cross Section

PREPARED BY:

John A. Martin & Associates 25129 The Old Road, Suite 316

Stevenson Ranch, CA 91381 Chuck Whitaker, Principal

[email protected]

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS: BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS / IMPACT ON BLDG.3




Figure 3B: Building 3- North Elevation Existing bridge to Building 4 to be demolished

Figure 2A: Building 2 - Second Floor Plan Figure 2B: Building 2 - South Elevation

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS: PLANS / ELEVATIONS

Figure 4B: Building 4- South Elevation

Building 1

Building4

Building 3

Firestone Boulevard

Building 2


Circa 1928: Building 1 (left), Building 3 (center rear), Building 2.

the facility until its 1980 closure due to economic con- straint and hardship. The complex was divided, and the west parcel at 2323 Firestone Boulevard was sold to the HON Furniture Company.

The District is eligible for the California Register for its contributions to development in Southern California including associations with the Harvey S. Firestone family, development of the tire and rubber industries in California, the automobile revolution and culture, and the early twentieth century industrial boom of Los Angeles. The District is also eligible for its represen- tation of Italianate Mediterranean Revival style architecture in 1920’s Southern California and the work of Curlett & Beelman. The use of Mediterranean Revival architectural styles in Southern California was par- ticularly popular in the 1910’s and 1920’s, rooted in concepts and ideals emerging about the development of California’s regional identity. The Firestone plant is a direct connection to this expression of California re- gionalism. The buildings also serve as important rep- resentations of early twentieth century factory planning and architecture.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION GOALS

The SGEC Master Plan intends that development on the site complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Standards) or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings,(Rehabilitation Standards). In California, a project in conformance with the Standards is considered to have mitigated effects on historical resources to a less than significant level.

PREPARED BY: SWCA

625 Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 190 South Pasadena, CA 91030

Shannon Carmack, Architectural Historian [email protected]

CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES

To comply with the Standards, it is important to identify the character-defining features of each historic building. These are the tangible, visual elements of a building that collectively create its historic identity and convey its significance. These may include but are not limited to materials, craftsmanship, construction details, overall shape and size of rooms and spaces, features and details, spatial relationships, and contributing setting. For most projects, the exterior physical features of buildings, structures, objects, sites and districts are the most critical because they are most likely to be affected by proposed projects and are gen-

PROPERTY SIGNIFICANCE AND HISTORY

In September 2009 the project area, as well as the adjacent property at 2323 Firestone Boulevard, was evaluated for historic signifi cance as part of the environmental clearance for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the East Los Angeles Col- lege Satellite Campus Project, and found eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Re- sources (hereafter referred to as California Register). The Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, South Gate Historic District (hereafter referred to as District) includes the four buildings on the SGEC Master Plan project site (known as Buildings 1-4) and two buildings on the adjacent parcel (Building 5 and a Quonset Hut). A pedestrian bridge connecting Building 1 and 2, and the gateposts, guardhouses and wall which surround both properties, were also found to be contributing elements to the District.

The Firestone Tire and Rubber Company began construction for its South Gate facility in 1927. In 1928, it consisted of three buildings, known as Buildings 1- 3

in the current Master Plan site, designed by the Los Angeles-based architecture fi rm Curlett & Beelman in an Italianate Mediterranean Revival style. This was the fi rst Firestone facility outside of Akron, Ohio. Over the years, the complex developed to meet the growing demands of the automobile industry in the West, and the expanded to include the adjacent parcel to the west on which,a new warehouse facility, (known as Building 5) was constructed in 1941. Four related out- buildings (including the eligible Quonset Hut) on the western parcel were constructed circa 1940’s-1950’s.

Many factors infl uenced the development of the property, including demand for Firestone products in West Coast markets, availability of rubber from Asia, proximity to the shipping ports already receiving raw materials for Firestone, availability of labor forces, land for future expansion and proximity to railroad lines. New work areas, conveyor lines, storage facilities, utility buildings, and manufacturing areas were all part of the booming tire and rubber complex. Not only was Firestone a major factor in the transportation industry, the company created thousands of jobs and transformed the predominately agricultural landscape into a thriving industrial complex. Firestone occupied

PROJECT PLAN

The future East Los Angeles Community College satellite campus, the South Gate Educational Center (SGEC), will be remarkable among community colleges as an expression of social change within a context of architectural compatibility. The resulting cohesive character of the future campus will be the beneficiary of the historic development of the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company site from the late 1920’s.

Key components of the SGEC Master Plan include retention of Building 2, which will remain in its current condition and uses.

The SGEC project will include demolition of Buildings 1, 3 & 4 to make room for the new campus and construction of a new classroom/office building and new parking structure. The SGEC will accommodate rapid student population growth, meet current and future community needs, provide a full-service college curriculum for up to 9,000 students, preserve historic resources, support economic growth and redevelopment, and conserve nonrenewable resources.

The goal of the Standards is to preserve historic materials and character. The Standards and associated Guidelines make broad-brush recommendations for maintaining, repairing, and replacing historic materials, as well as designing new additions or making alterations. They cannot be used to make essential decisions about which features should be saved or changed. But, the Standards provide philosophical consistency for such work.

There are Standards for four distinct but interrelated approaches to the treatment of historic properties: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and recon- struction. The Rehabilitation Standards allow the most change in a historic resource, and make accommodations for new uses, stating “when repair and replacement of deteriorated features are necessary; when alterations or additions to the property are planned for a new or continued use; and when its depiction at a particular period of time is not appropriate, rehabilitation may be considered as a treatment” (Weeks and Grimmer 1995). Building 2 will not be touched at all by the SGEC project. Building 3 will require only the closure of the opening in its north wall resulting from demolition of the bridge to Building 4.

erally visible to the public.

Character-defining features are comprised of a relatively definable permutation of craftsmanship and ability to convey historic significance, public benefit, and integrity. Craftsmanship can range from high, possessing special artistic value, to low, where features are standard historic fabric common during the period of significance. A feature may be quintessential and indispensable, where without it the significance of the resource would be lost, to medium where without it the significance of the resource is diminished; to low, where its loss may have little effect. For public benefit, value can span from high, where the public can use or enjoy the feature with little or no effort, to medium if there is limited opportunity, to low if there is no opportunity for public use. Visibility ranges from primary, salient features visible from the street or a public space, to secondary, somewhat obscured features observable through doors and windows, to low visibility, such as private spaces. Integrity is conveyed well if the feature is intact as originally designed and built, medium if it is somewhat altered but still conveys significance, and low if the feature is substantially altered so as to no longer convey significance.

HISTORICAL REPORT


Preservation Brief No. 17, Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character, published by the Technical Preservation Services Division of the National Park Service in the U.S. Department of the Interior, defi nes a three-step process to identify character-defi ning features. Step 1 involves assessing the distinguishing physical aspects of the exterior of the building as a whole, including its setting, shape and massing, orientation, roof and roof features, projec- tions, and openings. Step 2 looks at the building more closely, including materials, trim, secondary features, and craftsmanship. Step 3 encompasses the interior, including individual spaces, relations or sequences of spaces (fl oor plan), surface fi nishes and materials, exposed structure, and interior features and details. Additional guidance is provided by Preservation Brief No. 18, Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings: Identifying and Preserving Character-Defi ning Ele- ments, also published by the Technical Preservation Services Division of the National Park Service in the U.S. Department of the Interior.

The character-defi ning features of the Master Plan site and its contributing resources that should be retained and repaired are summarized below. When possible, these features should be preserved in place, or replaced in kind or with appropriate substitute materials, so that the rehabilitation scheme conforms to the Standards.

BUILDING 1 The following character-defi ning features of Building 1 are considered signifi cant, and as the building will not be altered by the SGEC project they will be retained:

• Urban setting • Two-story height and rectangular massing • Italianate Mediterranean Revival architecture • Tan stucco cladding • Curved red terra cotta roof tiles • Simple roofl ine stringcourses • Symmetrical multi-light, metal sash fenestration • Square pyramidal-roofed portals • Saw tooth, edged roof lines with clearstory

windows • Exposed steel trusses and beams

BUILDING 2 The SGEC makes no use of Building 2, and its character-defining features thus will be retained:

• Urban setting • Southeasterly orientation • Volumes arranged with a central three-story tower

and two-story receding wings • Italianate Mediterranean Revival architecture • Tan stucco cladding • Curved red terra cotta roof tiles • Arched and rectangular multi-light metal sash

windows • Sunken window panels on wings two-stories

in height. • Simple stringcourse detailing • Central square tower with prominently-featured

clock and sculpted copper capped steeple • Copper ornamented sconces • Symmetrical multi-light, metal sash fenestration • Corner entry with glass doors and projecting glass

and steel alcove. • Elaborate keystone entry arch with bas-relief

head. • Interior entry lobby, with glazed-tiles walls and

fl oors and mosaic murals • Vaulted ceilings and arches • Spherical light fi xtures • Wood panel and glass partition walls within

building wings

BUILDING 3 The character-defi ning features of Building 3 are similar to those of Building 1 and will be retained:

• Urban setting • Four-story height and rectangular massing • Italianate Mediterranean Revival architecture • Tan stucco cladding • Curved red terra cotta roof tiles • Simple roofl ine stringcourses • Symmetrical multi-light, metal sash fenestration • Square pyramidal-roofed portals

OTHER FEATURES The gateposts and walls that surround the property should be retained on the Firestone and Santa Fe frontages to the greatest degree feasible.

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

The historic significance, value and association of the principal existing buildings and features on the property will be preserved, as these will not be affected by implementation of the SGEC project. The following measures identified in the Standards do apply to the project:

• To the greatest extent feasible, district con- tributors and historically signifi cant features, areas and setting elements of the Firestone Tire & Rubber South Gate Plant will be retained.

• Application of the Standards will help guide work methods for specific needs, including but not limited to exterior materials, fi nishes, roofs, windows, entrances and porches, structural systems, mechanical systems, the site, the setting, energy efficiency, and new additions.

• Construction of new buildings shall be differentiated from the old and compatible with the its massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and environment. New construction will be compatible with the District elements; however it will not be designed in a manner that would create a false sense of history.

REFERENCES

Nelson, Lee H., FAIA. September 1988. Preservation Brief No. 17: Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Pre- serving Their Character. Washington, DC: U.S. De- partment of the Interior, National Park Service, Tech- nical Preservation Services. Available at: www.cr.nps. gov/hps/tps/briefs/brief17.htm

Ward, Jandl, H. October 1988. Preservation Brief No. 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings: Iden- tifying and Preserving Character-Defi ning Elements. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- tional Park Service, Technical Preservation Services. Available at: www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/brief18.htm

Schmidt, Andrew. 2003. “Historical Analysis for the South Gate Adult Community School” (letter report to Stacey Brenner, Offi ce of Environmental Health and Safety, Los Angeles Unifi ed School District, 15 Au- gust, 2003. Jones & Stokes

Weeks, Kay and Grimmer, Anne. 1995. The Secre- tary of the Interior’s Standards for The Treatment of Historic Properties With Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings for National Park Service, Washington D.C.

• Large unobstructed interior spaces for manufacturing

Circa 1928: Buildings 1 and 3 (center) were subsequently expanded.

HISTORICAL REPORT


TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM/NETWORK TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN PREPARED BY:

Linscott Law & Greenspan, Engineers 600 South Lake Avenue, Suite 500, Pasadena, CA 91106

Clare M. Look-Jaeger, P.E., Principal [email protected]

EXISTING SETTING AND CONTEXT

The South Gate Educational Center (SGEC) site is uniquely and centrally located within a multi-modal transportation network including major freeways, ar-

ADJACENT ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS

Both Firestone Boulevard and Santa Fe Avenue provide vehicular access to and from the site. Firestone is classifi ed as a Boulevard (Primary Arterial) in the

PRINCIPLES AND GOALS

Provide Multi-Modal Access Opportunities Every effort is being made to reduce the reliance on private automobiles by enhancing opportunities for

well as internal to the site. It focuses on the design and integration of an internal campus circulation plan whereby all users can interact, with places for com-

hanced in the Master Plan.

Non-Vehicular Circulation

Alfred C. Ying, P.G, P,T.P. [email protected]

terials, and transit and bicycle systems and corridors.

The site is served by major freeways including the Glenn Anderson Freeway Transit Way (I-105), the Harbor Freeway (I-110) and the Long Beach Freeway (I-710). The Metro Green Line light rail system is less than two miles south of the site and the site is one mile from the Metro Blue Line light rail station at Firestone Boulevard in adjacent Walnut Park.

Students, faculty and staff can access the site via multiple modes of transportation in lieu of using personal automobiles. Bus service is provided to the vicinity by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transporta- tion Authority (Metro) via Lines 115 and 612. Until recently, a shuttle bus service by ELAC provided free service to students between the main ELAC campus and the existing satellite site across Firestone from the SGEC site. Nine shuttles per day in each direction were provided Monday through Thursday. This service is scheduled to resume in Spring, 2013.

Firestone Boulevard is designated as a “Transit Cor- ridor” in the City of South Gate’s General Plan 2035 Mobility Element. In addition, the project site is also an identifi ed “bicycle hub” in the City of South Gate’s General Plan 2035 Mobility Element.

The South Gate Educational Center site adjoins a Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way at north, currently used for freight, which has signalized at-grade crossings at Santa Fe Avenue.

City’s Mobility Element and is also a designated Pri- mary Transit Street. Firestone carries approximately 29,000 vehicles per day (Average Daily Traffi c). San- ta Fe Avenue is classifi ed as a Street (Collector) in the City’s Mobility Element and is also a designated Class II Bike Lane. Santa Fe carries approximately 16,000 vehicles per day (Average Daily Traffi c).

The adjacent intersection of Santa Fe Avenue and Firestone Boulevard is currently operating at Level of Service (LOS) D during weekday AM and PM peak hours. The adjacent intersection of Alameda Street and Firestone Boulevard is currently operating at LOS D and LOS E (LOS E represents more congestion than LOS D) during weekday AM and PM peak hours respectively. While these operations indicate some level of existing congestion, the design of the Master Plan takes these conditions into account to provide a circulation plan that integrates well with the surrounding roadway network/system. Refer to the SGEC Master Plan document for the vicinity map and descriptions of adjacent roadway characteristics in more detail.

The Master Plan circulation plan is important to the success of the South Gate Educational Center. Im- proved multi-modal access, enhanced internal and external circulation and connectivity, as well as convenient and effi cient parking opportunities are essential. The overall accessibility and integration of existing and future planned transit services is also a critical element of the circulation plan.

transit ridership, walking and bicycling. Firestone Boulevard is designated as a Primary Arterial and a Class II Bike Lane is identifi ed on Santa Fe Avenue between Independence/Ardmore Avenues and South- ern Avenue in the South Gate General Plan 2035 Mobility Element, which also identifi es a designated bicycle hub at the South Gate Educational Center site.

Transit/Shuttle Integration A key goal of the City’s Mobility Element and the SGEC Master Plan is to expand and enhance the existing transit service connections so that the site is more accessible and convenient to the SGEC population group (including expanded route coverage, increased service frequencies, extended operating hours, and provision of transit-related amenities). Also, a key component of the Mobility Element is the introduction and operation of a local bus transit service with convenient bus transfer points that would circulate around the City connecting all residential neighborhoods to key commercial, institutional, and recreational destinations. Through these connections, transfers to other more regional transportation systems (e.g., Metro Green and Blue Lines) will be possible.

An Effi cient Circulation System for All Users The Master Plan focuses on providing a safe, effi cient circulation system that is well integrated and intercon- nected for all students, faculty, staff as well as visitors. The Master Plan also proposes a comprehensive wayfi nding sign program.

A Safe and Effective Pedestrian Experience On Site The Master Plan is designed to facilitate pedestrian connections between the SGEC and transit services along Firestone Boulevard and Santa Fe Avenue as

munal activities.

Vehicular Circulation The circulation scheme for vehicular traffi c has been carefully reviewed and considered in the Master Plan. Standard traffi c signal warrant calculations have been prepared to determine if and when traffi c signals should be installed at the project driveway locations. It has been determined on a preliminary basis that main access points on Santa Fe Avenue and Fires- tone Boulevard will be signalized.

It is proposed that the driveway intersection on Santa Fe Avenue at Ardmore Avenue will be signalized in order to allow direct access to/from the parking structure. Based on the results of peak hour traffi c signal warrant analyses, signal installation at this location should occur prior to occupancy. The traffi c signal should include a protected left-turn phase for northbound Santa Fe Avenue motorists in order to facilitate the safe and effi cient processing of vehicles during peak student arrival time periods.

It is proposed that the driveway intersection on Fires- tone Boulevard also be signalized to provide effi cient shared access for the SGEC and the adjacent HON property. Based on the results of peak hour traffi c signal warrant analyses, signal installation at this location should also occur prior to the opening of the SGEC. The traffi c signal should include a protected left-turn phase for eastbound Firestone Boulevard motorists, in order to facilitate the safe and effi cient processing of vehicles during peak student arrival time periods.

An existing internal north-south roadway from Fires- tone Boulevard into the site is envisioned to be en-

Circulation for non-vehicular travel is provided along clear pedestrian pathways between the Santa Fe Avenue and Firestone Boulevard entrances and the SGEC building and parking. Adequate sidewalks, raised curbs, and striped crosswalks other features will be implemented in the Master Plan at key roadway crossing points internal to the site. Pedestrian crosswalks are also planned to be installed at the signalized driveway intersections at both the Santa Fe Avenue and Firestone Boulevard driveway intersections.

Parking Approximately 1,660 parking spaces will be provided for the SGEC: a multi-level parking structure with approximately 1,600 parking spaces near the north end of the site, and a surface lot with approximately 60 parking spaces at the west end of the site. One of the structure’s entries will be directly off Santa Fe Av- enue, and will be provided with an appropriate number of lanes and adequate reservoir so as to prevent back-up or congestion off-site on the adjacent street system. Parking facilities will be sized to meet all demands from the various SGEC users, including students, faculty, staff and visitors.

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS


CONTENTS

Introduction Executive Summary Sustainable Sites Water Effi ciency Energy & Atmosphere Materials & Resources Indoor Environmental Quality Innovation & Design Process LEED Scorecard: Gold Scenario ‘A’ LEED Scorecard: Gold Scenario ‘B’ LEED Scorecard: Platinum Scenario ‘C’

INTRODUCTION

A 21 A 21

A 22 - 26 A 26 - 27 A 27 - 30 A 30 - 33 A 33 - 37

A 38 A 39 - 40 A 41 - 42 A 43 - 44

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SGEC Master Plan The SGEC Master Plan proposes demolition of existing Building 4, preparation of the site, and construction of a new classroom/offi ce building, parking structure, and associated surface parking, roadways, hardscape areas and landscaping to create a new satellite campus for East Los Angeles College.

LEED Certifi cation is Required In accordance with LACCD and other directives, the SGEC shall be designed and constructed using the USGBC LEED-NC rating system. The minimum rating level for the project to achieve is LEED-NC Gold; however, the goal is the reach the highest certifi cation level feasible. The project has been pre-registered as LEED-NC v2.2.

What Is LEED? LEED is a green building rating system administered by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and the Green Building Certifi cation Institute (GBCI). LEED is based on points, or “credits.” Projects must achieve certain prerequisites and then accumulate credits by meeting additional criteria. Projects can achieve various levels of

to that building. These buildings may constitute the entire campus or a subset of an existing campus.

Documentation Once a project is registered, the project team begins to collect information and perform calculations to be submitted to LEED to prove compliance with the various credits and prerequisites. Various team members including the architect, engineers, and contractor are involved in LEED documentation. Project teams can take advantage of LEED-Online (https://leedonline.usgbc.org/Login.aspx) to submit all of their application materials.

Submitting for Certifi cation There are two options for submitting credits for certifi cation: 1) two- phase submission and 2) one submission. With the two-phase submission, design credits can be submitted and reviewed earlier in the project and are issued either “approval pending” or “denied”. Upon completion of the project, the fi nal construction credits are submitted. With the one submission option, design and construction credits are submitted together at the end of construction.

PREPARED BY: Antea Group

3229 E. Spring Street, Suite 201 Long Beach, CA 90806

Amber Keenoy, LEED AP BD+C, Senior Consultant [email protected]

Awarding of Certifi cation Upon delivery of the Final LEED Review, the Design/Build Team can accept or appeal the rating. If the Team accepts the results of the Final Review (or eventually accepts the rating after appeals), the project becomes an offi cial LEED project and the building receives a plaque identifying certifi cation level. Projects awarded LEED platinum certifi cation will receive a rebate for all certifi cation fees.

LEED Certifi cation Fees The certifi cation fee is based on the rating system that the project is certifying under and the size of the project. Our current estimate of certifi cation fees for the South Gate Educational Center is $6,150. However, Teams should contact GBCI for special pricing due to the fact that this project entails multiple buildings and is slated for LEED-

This report is an outline to help the Design/Build Team understand the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) certifi cation process and strategies for achieving increased energy and water effi ciency, greater occupant health, and reduced negative environmental impact for the South Gate Educational Center (SGEC).

This report includes a review of the LEED certifi cation process, fees, and other pertinent information, and provides a summary of each credit and recommendations on how to achieve it. The credit summaries and recommendations are organized according to LEED NC-2.2 Rating System categories (NC refers to New Construction). The categories are: Sustainable Sites, Water Effi ciency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materials & Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, and Innovation in Design. Overarching strategies that help achieve the LEED credits are summarized. The purpose of the strategies is to enable the project to position itself to achieve a LEED NC-3.0 Gold or Platinum rating from the Green Building Certifi cation Insti- tute (LEED certifi cation was formerly obtained through the United States Green Building Council).

This report also contains preliminary LEED-NC checklists for the project. In the checklists, the likelihood of each LEED point is pre- dicted, and an estimated project score is totalled.

certifi cation, “Certifi ed,” “Silver,” “Gold,” and “Platinum,” depending on the number of credits achieved. Achieving LEED certifi cation for a project involves a number of steps which are summarized below.

It is feasible for the SGEC to meet high-levels of energy effi ciency and achieve LEED Gold at minimum. Means and methods are up to the Design Build Team; however, there are several strategies outlined in this document which through careful design integration and planning will help to attain LEED Gold at minimum.

LEED for College Campuses There are three approaches to LEED-certifying buildings in a campus setting; the following two are relevant to the SGEC. The Design/ Build Team can choose which option makes the most sense.

• Certifying a group of new buildings as a package where the

entire building set will be rated as a package and only one rating received. These buildings may constitute the entire campus or be a subset of an existing campus.

• Certifying new buildings where each is constructed to a set

of standards and will receive an independent rating based on achievement of credits beyond the standards specifi c

Credit Interpretation Requests (CIRs) and Appeals In some cases, project teams may encounter diffi culties applying a LEED prerequisite or credit to a specifi c project. USGBC has established a review process for registered project inquiries, called credit interpretation requests (CIRs), to ensure that rulings are consistent and available to other projects. The cost for each CIR is $220. Upon submitting documentation for all LEED credits for all phases, the project will then be reviewed by a GBCI LEED credit reviewer. If credits are denied, the team has the option of appealing that ruling. Each appeal is $500 per credit.

Review LEED Templates and additional submittals for each prerequisite and credit are reviewed for compliance. Within 25 business days, the GBCI issues a Preliminary LEED Review document noting credit achievement anticipated, pending, and denied. Often the LEED Re- viewer asks clarifying questions on a number of credit submissions. The project team then has 25 business days to submit responses and possibly additional supporting documents. Then GBCI conducts a Final LEED Review of the application within 15 business days of receiving the supplementary submittal and notifi es the project contact of certifi cation status.

NC, Multiple Buildings for College Campuses and is already preregistered as LEED NC v3.0.

CALGreen DSA Mandatory Provisions As of January 1, 2013, CALGreen DSA mandatory provisions went into effect with other provisions effective July 1, 2013. CALGreen is part of the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11 and must be adhered to. CALGreen mandatory provisions are outlined throughout this sustainability narrative and related appendixes. All mandatory provisions must be outlined and complied with from the project onset. The DSA reviews submittals for compliance at the application intake (same as for the California Energy Code). Re- fer to the Appendix section 8.4 CALGreen Mandatory Provisions Comparison Checklist for an overview of CALGreen mandatory provisions, and LACCD sustainable mandates with tie in to LEED synergies.

LEED STRATEGIES - SUPERSEDED


SUSTAINABLE SITES SUSTAINABLE SITES CREDIT SUMMARY

Site Design Overview Site design and selection incorporates a number of interrelated components that broadly address suitability for use. The topics include transportation, pedestrian connectivity and safety, habitat conservation, open space, site disturbance, light pollution, surface hydrology and storm water design, acoustics and view.

GENERAL SITE DESIGN STRATEGIES

S1. BUILDING ORIENTATION -

MAXIMIZE SOUTH FACING EXPOSURE

Description: To the extent possible, the SGEC should enhance south-facing exposure and minimize or protect west-facing windows.

Costs: There is no anticipated increase in capital cost for this strategy.

Benefi ts: Reduced building energy consumption through enhanced daylight- ing and passive ventilation opportunities.

S2. LANDSCAPING – MAXIMIZE VEGETATED OPEN SPACE

Description: Providing outdoor vegetated open space can have a signifi cant impact on occupants’ quality of life by maximizing areas for recreational activities and interaction with other community members. It also has a signifi cant positive effect on local habitats, micro-climate and storm water management.

Costs: The cost associated with this strategy is minimal to no cost.

Benefi ts: Provides a visually appealing, useful environment for occupants and can reduce building energy consumption by reducing heat islands.

S3. STORM WATER DESIGN – MAXIMIZE INFILTRATION ON-SITE

Description: Implement a storm water management plan that reduces impervious cover, promotes infi ltration, and captures and treats the storm water runoff on-site. Aim to improve storm water management using methods that restore the natural functions of the site to the maximum extent practicable. A technique that could be easily utilized is using pervious pavement for hardscape.

Costs: Pervious pavement: Minimal fi rst-cost increase for pervious pavement, on average $1 more per SF as compared to asphalt concrete pavement. Storm water collection: Costs depend upon the size of the system but can be integrated into the landscape at minimal cost.

Benefi ts: Pervious pavement promotes infi ltration into the ground. Each storm water strategy reduces or eliminates the need for other strategies such as retention ponds which consume site space.

SS PREREQUISITE 1: CONSTRUCTION POLLUTION PREVENTION ACTIVITY

Responsible Party: Civil Engineer

Intent: To reduce pollution from construction by controlling soil erosion, wa- terway sedimentation and airborne dust generation.

Requirements: The Team shall create and implement an Erosion and Sedimentation Control (ESC) Plan for all construction activities associated with the project. It must conform to the erosion and sedimentation requirements of the 2003 EPA Construction General Permit and shall de- scribe the measures implemented to accomplish the following:

• Prevent loss of soil during construction by storm water runoff and/or wind erosion; stockpile topsoil for reuse.

• Prevent sedimentation of storm sewer or receiving streams. • Prevent polluting the air with dust and particulate matter.

Status: This is a prerequisite and is mandatory for certifi cation.

Recommended Project Strategy:

• Civil Engineer develops an ESC Plan during design phase. • Employ temporary or permanent seeding, mulching, earth

dikes, silt fencing, sediment traps and basins, etc.

Costs: No additional cost as the design team will be required to develop an ESC Plan as part of the NPDES Stormwater Quality Requirements for Construction Activities to meet local permitting requirements.

Benefi ts:

• Protect receiving waters from sedimentation/pollutants. • Minimize/eliminate diffi cult/expensive mitigation measures.

Payback: There is no direct payback associated with ESC measures.

Additional Resources:

• EPA Construction General Permit information: http://cfpub. epa.gov/npdes/storm water/cgp.cfm

• The Erosion Control Technology Center provides guidance on the application and installation of erosion control products: www.ectc.org

SS CREDIT 1: SITE SELECTION


Intent: To avoid development of inappropriate sites and reduce the environmental impact from the location of the project.

Requirements: Do not develop buildings, hardscape, roads, or parking areas on portions of the site that:

• are defi ned as prime farmland by the USDA • were previously undeveloped and have an elevation

lower than 5-feet above a 100-year fl ood plain defi ned by FEMA

• are specifi cally identifi ed as habitat for any species on Fed- eral or State threatened or endangered lists

• are within 100-feet of any wetlands • were previously undeveloped land within 50 feet of a water

body defi ned by sea, lakes river, stream or tributary which could support fi sh, recreation, or industrial use in accordance with the Clean Water Act

• were prior to acquisition public parkland

Status: South Gate Educational Center meets the requirements of this credit.

Recommended Project Strategy: To achieve this credit, the civil engineer shall verify that the development footprint does not encroach on any of the above mentioned criteria, and complete the LEED Submittal template to refl ect such.

Costs: No additional costs.

Benefi ts: Not building on inappropriate sites preserves sensitive areas for wild- life habitat, recreation, and ecological balance. Additionally, building away from fl ood-prone areas reduces the risk of property damage.

Payback: There is no direct payback.

LEED STRATEGIES: SUSTAINABLE SITES


SS CREDIT 2: DEVELOPMENT DENSITY & COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY

Responsible Party: Architect

Intent: To channel development to urban areas with existing infrastructure, protect greenfi elds, and preserve habitat and natural resources.

Requirements: The SGEC will likely use Option 2 – Community Connectivity. To meet the requirements, the project must be on a previously developed site AND within ½ mile walk of an existing residential zone or neighborhood with an average density of 10 units per acre AND within ½ mile of at least ten basic services. Only two services can be within the planned project. Only two restaurants may be counted. Pedestrian access must be provided between the building and the services.

Status: Confi rm what resources exist within ½ mile. Preliminary data indicates the SGEC meets the requirements for this credit.

Recommended Project Strategy: The architect shall document that the project is on a site that was previously developed and document the location of services within a ½ mile radius of the project and the residential neighborhood(s). Services that meet the requirements include gym, museum, hospi- tal, theater, community center, fi re station, restaurants, pharmacy, post offi ce, bank, church and library.

Costs: No additional cost.

Benefi ts: Reduced transportation impact.


Additional Resources: The Urban Land Institute promotes responsible land use as a means for enhancing environmental quality: www.washington.uli.org

SS CREDIT 3: BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT

Responsible Party: Owner/Architect

Intent: To rehabilitate damaged sites where development is complicated by contamination, reducing pressure on undeveloped land.

Status: No portion of the SGEC project site is suspected to be considered brownfi eld. However, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were found in preliminary soil samples collected near Building 1.

Recommended Project Strategy: Sampling at the project site should be considered to ensure VOC migration has not occurred.

Costs: There is added cost if an Environmental Phase II Assessment is required. There would also be cost associated with any required re- mediation, an average range from <1% of overall budget up to 5%.

Benefi ts: Reduces development pressure on pristine land.


Additional Resources: The ASTM International website provides information about con- ducting a Phase II environmental site assessment: www.astm.org.

SS CREDIT 4.1: ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION: PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION


Intent: To reduce pollution and land development impacts from automobile use by facilitating and encouraging use of public transit.

Requirements: The SGEC will use Option 2 – Bus Service. This project is anticipated to qualify as there are bus lines within ¼ mile, with one or more stops for two or more public bus lines usable by project occupants and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) requires a shuttle between ELAC and South Gate.

Status: Project should qualify based on the above notations.

Recommended Project Strategy: Document nearby public transportation options accessible by SGEC occupants.

Costs: No added cost above and beyond requirements outlined in MMRP (ensuring a bus shuttle is put into place for ELAC and South Gate).

Benefi ts: Reduced transportation impacts and improved air quality


Additional Resources: The EPA’s Offi ce of Transportation and Air Quality website provides an array of web links to resources for organizations that are inter- ested in promoting commuter choice programs: www.epa.gov/otaq

SS CREDIT 4.2: TRANSPORTATION: BICYCLE STORAGE & CHANGING ROOMS


Intent: To reduce pollution and land development impacts from automobile use by encouraging and facilitating use of bicycles as an alternative.

Requirements: The SGEC will likely use Option 1 – Commercial/Institutional Build- ings. To meet the requirements the design must provide covered

storage facilities for securing bicycles for 5% or more of building occupants. The storage facilities must be located within 200 yards of a building entrance. Additionally, shower facilities must be placed for .5 % of the building’s full-time employees (FTE).

Status: Need to locate places for bicycle storage per Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) Traffi c and Parking and to provide for and encourage the use of bicycles.

Recommended Project Strategy: Design secure, covered bicycle storage capacity within 200 yards of the building entrance. Include shower facilities for .05% of the FTE.

Costs: Cost for bicycle racks/secure storage is minimal.

Benefi ts: Reduced transportation impacts, improved air quality, and improved quality of life for occupants.


Additional Resources: The EPA’s Offi ce of Transportation and Air Quality website provides an array of web links to resources for organizations that are inter- ested in promoting commuter choice programs: www.epa.gov/otaq

SS CREDIT 4.3: TRANSPORTATION: LOW EMITTING/ FUEL EFFICIENT VEHICLES


Intent: To reduce pollution from automobile use.

Requirements: There are three options for achieving this credit. Option 1 requires purchasing low-emissions vehicles for 3% of full-time employees. Option 2 requires preferred parking (closest to project entrances)



for low-emitting and fuel-effi cient vehicles for 5% of the total parking capacity on site. Option 3 requires installation of alternative fuel refueling stations for 3% of the total parking capacity on site.

Status: Option 1 is not practical for the SGEC. Option 2 requires locating and striping 86 preferred parking stalls. Option 3 requires providing 52 alternative fuel (EV charging) stations.

Recommended Project Strategy: Team to provide 52 pay-for-use EV charging stations. Users would pay approximately 2 cents per kWh. Initial cost would be recouped in 7-10 years, with $6000-$8000 annual income afterwords.

Costs: Parking striping for low-emitting vehicles stalls averages $0.25 per SF. The average cost for an electric refuelling station ranges from $5,000 to $15,000 for a two car recharging station.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced transportation impacts • Improved air quality • Improved quality of life for tenants

Payback: Break-even in 7-10 years, $6-10K annual revenue afterwords.

Additional Resources: ACEEE’s Green Book for Cars defi nes low-emitting and fuel-effi cient vehicles as scoring 40 or above: www.greenercars.org

SS CREDIT 4.4: ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION: PARKING CAPACITY


Intent: To reduce pollution and land development impacts from auto use.

Status: The SGEC does not qualify for this credit. The SGEC does not fall within the City of South Gate planning and zoning requirements regarding

number allowable parking stalls, so per LEED requirements must meet City of Portland, Title 33, Planning and Zoning requirements in which the maximum number of allowable stalls is 1,473.

SS CREDIT 5.1: SITE DEVELOPMENT: PROTECT/RESTORE HABITAT

Responsible Party: Landscape Architect

Description: The intent is to conserve existing natural areas and restore damaged areas to provide habitat and promote biodiversity.

Requirements: For the SGEC, the suggestion is to use Option 2 – Previously Devel- oped Site. To meet the requirements for this credit the Team must restore or protect a minimum of 50% of the site area (excluding the building footprint) with native and/or adapted vegetation. The use of Green Roofi ng is strongly suggested, because the Tram it may apply the vegetated roof surface in the calculations and the area is reduced to 20% of the site.

“Native/adapted vegetation” are plants indigenous to a locality or cultivates of native plants that are adapted to the local climate and are not considered invasive species or noxious weeds.

Status: Site is previously graded and will need to be restored with native plantings.

Recommended Project Strategy: Landscape Architect to design 50% of site area with native species, or preferably utilize Green Roofi ng and design 20% of site area with native species.

Costs: The costs pertaining to this credit can vary widely and are dependent upon selected strategy.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced water, fertilizer and landscape maintenance costs.

• Provides habitat and promotes biodiversity.

Payback: There is no payback associated with open space.

Additional Resources: Native plant and horticultural societies are useful resources for selecting site-appropriate vegetation native to South Gate.

SS CREDIT 5.2: SITE DEVELOPMENT: MAXIMIZE OPEN SPACE


Intent: To provide a high ratio of open space to development footprint to promote biodiversity.

Requirements: To meet the requirements for this credit the project must provide vegetated open space area adjacent to the building that is equal to the building footprint.

Status: Given the expected size of the new classroom/offi ce building and parking structure and necessary surface parking and roadways, the SGEC site appears not large enough to quality for this credit.

SS CREDIT 6.1: STORM WATER DESIGN: QUANTITY CONTROL


Intent: To limit disruption of natural hydrology by increasing on-site infi ltration and managing storm water runoff.

Requirements: The project will mostly likely use Option 2 – Existing Imperviousness is greater than 50%. The Civil Engineer must implement a storm water management plan that results in a 25% decrease in the volume of storm water runoff from two-year, 24-hour design storms.

Status: Develop plan to provide treatment and reduction in fl ow.


• Civil Engineer to design the project site to maintain natural storm water fl ows by promoting infi ltration.

• Design the site to minimize impervious surfaces. • Where paving/hardscape is used, use pervious concrete. • Reuse storm water for non-potable uses such as land-

scape irrigation, toilet/urinal fl ushing and custodial uses.

Costs: For detention and retention costs, average rate is $1.50 per gallon.

Benefi ts:

• Protect water bodies from pollution • Reduced erosion and sedimentation • Reduced impact on municipal storm water systems • Potential source of water for reuse on site

Payback: There is no payback associated with storm water measures.

Additional Resources: Storm water PA details non-structural storm water best management practices: www.stormwaterpa.org/5-8-2.html#bmp. The EPA offers design guides, fact sheets and cost estimates for strategies that reduce storm water runoff: www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid.

SS CREDIT 6.2: STORM WATER DESIGN: QUALITY CONTROL


Intent: To reduce or implement water pollution by reducing impervious cover, increasing on site fi ltration, eliminating sources of contaminants and removing pollutants from storm water runoff.

Requirements: To meet the requirements, the Civil Engineer must implement a storm water management plan that reduces impervious cover, pro-



motes infi ltration, and captures and treats stormwater runoff from 90% of the average annual rainfall using acceptable Best Manage- ment Practices (BMPs). BMPs used to treat runoff must be capable of removing 80% of the average annual post-development total suspended solids load based on existing monitoring reports. BMPs are considered to meet these criteria if (1) they are designed in accordance with standards and specifi cations from a state or local program that has adopted these performance standards, or (2) there exists in-fi eld performance monitoring data demonstrating compliance with the criteria. Data must conform to accepted protocol (e.g. Technology Acceptance Reciprocity Partnership (TARP) Washing- ton State Department of Ecology) for BMP monitoring.

Status: Project to include strategies for treatment.


• Civil Engineer and Landscape Architect to specify alternative surfaces such as pervious concrete and other measures to minimize impervious surfaces.

• Civil Engineer to specify non-structural techniques such as vegetated swales, disconnected impervious surfaces and rainwater recycling to reduce imperviousness and promote infi ltration thereby reducing pollutant loadings.

Costs: Infi ltration typically has no signifi cant cost impact. For treatment manholes, average cost is $45,000 per manhole.

Benefi ts:

• Protect water bodies from pollution • Reduce erosion and sedimentation • Reduce impact on municipal systems that convey and treat

storm water volumes • Potential source of water for reuse on site

Payback: There is no payback associated with storm water measures.

Additional Resources: Storm water PA details non-structural storm water best management practices: www.stormwaterpa.org/5-8-2.html#bmp. The EPA offers design guides, fact sheets and cost estimates for strategies that reduce storm water runoff: www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid. The National

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) provides exten- sive information about storm water control measures and BMPs: http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/storm water/menuofbmps/index.cfm.

SS CREDIT 7.1: HEAT ISLAND EFFECT: NON-ROOF


Intent: To reduce heat islands (thermal gradient differences between developed and undeveloped areas) to minimize impact on micro-climate and habitat.

Requirements: For the SGEC the suggestion is Option 2 – Under Cover Parking. To meet the requirements, the design must place at least 50% of parking spaces under cover (underground, under deck, under roof or under a building). Any roof used to shade or cover parking must have a Solar Refl ectance Index (SRI) of at least 29. Based on the anticipated parking structure design, the SGEC should qualify for this credit.

Status: Need to confi rm that parking will be mostly under cover.

Recommended Project Strategy: Place at least 50% of parking under cover.

Costs: As project requires a parking garage, there is no added cost.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced heat absorption by parking infrastructure reduces impact on local micro-climate

• Non-impacted micro-climates reduce cooling energy costs and HVAC equipment needs

Payback: There is payback associated with this credit in the sense of reducing cooling energy costs/HVAC equipment needs.

Additional Resources: The EPA provides basic information about heat island effect and its social and environmental costs: www.epa.gov/heatisland

SS CREDIT 7.2: HEAT ISLAND EFFECT: ROOF


Intent: To reduce heat islands (thermal gradient differences between developed and undeveloped areas) to minimize impact on micro-climate and habitat.

Requirements: For the SGEC the suggestions are Option 1 – SRI Roof or Option 3 – High Albedo and Vegetated Roof. To meet the requirements for Op- tion 1 roofi ng materials must have a Solar Refl ectance Index (SRI) of at least 78 for low-sloped roofs less than or equal to 2:12, or 29 for steep-sloped roofs greater than or equal to 2:12 for a minimum of 75% of the roof area. For Option 3 the Architect must use high albedo and vegetated roof surfaces so that: (Area of SRI roof/0.75) + (Area of vegetated roof/0.5) = Total Roof Area

Status: Confi rm roofi ng will be designed to be compliant.


• Architect to specify and Contractor to install high-albedo concrete topping roofs to reduce heat absorption.

• SRI compliant material must cover 75% of the total roof area. Exclude areas of equipment and appurtenances from calculations.

• Include clear specifi cation requirements assuring SRI performance of material submittal.

• Architect to specify and design for green roofi ng to reduce heat absorption and reduce storm water runoff.

Costs: Average costs for a cool roof is at $1 to $2 more per SF of roof space in comparison to a standard tar-based black roof.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced heat absorption by building infrastructure which reduces impact on local micro-climate

• Non-impacted micro-climates reduce cooling energy costs and HVAC equipment needs

Payback: There is payback associated with this credit in the sense of reducing cooling energy costs/HVAC equipment needs.

SS CREDIT 8: LIGHT POLLUTION REDUCTION

Responsible Party: Electrical Engineer

Intent: To minimize light trespass from the building and site, reduce sky- glow and glare to improve nighttime visibility and reduce development impact on nocturnal environments.

Requirements: To meet the requirements for this credit the project must be designed to meet the following:

For Interior Lighting: The angle of maximum candela from each interior luminaire in the building shall intersect opaque building interior surfaces and not exit out through the windows OR all non-emergency interior lighting shall be automatically controlled to turn off during non-business hours. Provide manual override capability for after-hours use.

For Exterior Lighting: Only illuminate areas as required for safety and comfort. Do not exceed 80% of the lighting power densities for exterior areas and 50% for building facades and landscape features as defi ned in ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004 Exterior Lighting Section, without amendments. The project must be classifi ed under the appropriate zone as defi ned in IESNA RP-33 and must follow all of the requirements for that specifi c zone.

Status: Confi rm if lighting to be developed per requirements.


• Adopt site lighting criteria to maintain safe light levels while avoiding off-site lighting and night sky pollution.

• Minimize site lighting where possible and model the site lighting using a computer model.

• Consider employing the following technologies to reduce light pollution: full cutoff luminaries, low-refl ectance sur-



WATER EFFICIENCY

Costs:

faces and low-angle spotlights. Attention should be given to energy effi ciency, brightness ratio control and shielding.

Water Design Overview Potable water use is a major environmental concern for the Southern California Region. Water consumption in buildings can be substantially reduced without impacting the user experience. By employing

All major manufacturers offer low-fl ow products and many offer waterless urinals. East Los Angeles College uses Falcon/Sloan for their waterless urinals.

Benefi ts: Reduced water use and landscape maintenance.

Payback:

Computer modeling may add cost. Cost savings may be realized through reduced fi xture count. Operational cost savings may be achieved through appropriate site lighting levels.

Benefi ts:

• Electricity cost savings • Reduced night sky light pollution Reduced heat absorption

by building infrastructure reducing impact on micro-climate

Payback: There is payback associated with this credit in the sense of reducing cooling electricity costs.

Additional Resources: ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 is available for purchase at www. ashrae.org/technology/page/548 The International Dark-Sky Association provides information regarding night sky preservation: www.darksky.org

even a few of the strategies listed below, 30-40 percent water savings can be realized.

GENERAL WATER EFFICIENCY

DESIGN STRATEGIES

W1. LOW FLOW PLUMBING FIXTURE SELECTION

It is recommended that all plumbing fi xtures meet the suggested fl ow rates outlined below:

Suggested Maximum Flow Rates:

• Lavatories 0.5 gpm aerators with meter controls • Water Closets <1.3 gpf or dual-fl ush • Urinals 0.125 gpf or waterless urinals • Kitchen Sinks 0.5 to 1.8 gpm (the lower the better) • Showerheads 1.5 gpm

W1.1 LAVATORY FAUCETS, WATER CLOSETS AND URINALS, AND SHOWERHEADS

Description: A number of low-fl ow electronic faucets have been introduced by major manufacturers, including but not limited to:

• Sloan - Solis Solar-Powered Faucet, with 0.5 gpm aerator • Toto - EcoPower Electronic Faucet, with a hydropower self-

generating system.

Specify dual-fl ush toilets for women’s rooms. These typically provide a 1.6 gallon fl ush when the handle is pushed one way and a 0.8 gallon fl ush when pushed the other way. Specify low-fl ow single-fl ush (1.3 gallons per fl ush) toilets and waterless urinals for men’s rooms.

Specify low fl ow showerheads in all applicable areas.

Costs: Generally, costs associated with low-fl ow plumbing fi xtures may add a nominal cost increase to the project although some products may actually be less expensive.

Benefi ts:

• Lower water consumption • Lower water bills (operational costs)

WATER EFFICIENCY CREDIT SUMMARY

WE CREDIT 1.1: WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING:

REDUCE 50%


Intent: To limit or eliminate use of potable water or natural surface or subsurface water available on or near the site, for landscape irrigation.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the design must use water savings plant species to demonstrate 50% minimum savings in irrigation.

Status: Design should accommodate credit requirements.

Recommended Project Strategy: Provide a landscape plan that includes native grasses and other appropriate native and adapted plant species suited to soil and climate.

Costs: No added costs with careful selection of plant species.

Immediate: good design eliminates need for infrastructure.

WE CREDIT 1.2: WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING: NO POTABLE WATER


Intent: To limit or eliminate the use of potable water, or natural surface or subsurface water on or near the project site, for landscape irrigation.

Requirements: Do not propose permanent irrigation systems. Temporary irrigation systems used for plant establishment are allowed if removed within one year of installation.

Status: Design should accommodate credit requirements.

Recommended Project Strategy: Eliminate permanent irrigation needs if possible. Consider gray water system otherwise if allowable by local code.

Costs: No added cost due to removing irrigation system infrastructure.

Benefi ts: Reduced water use and landscape maintenance.

Payback: Immediate: good design eliminates need for infrastructure.

LEED STRATEGIES: SUSTAINABLE SITES / WATER EFFICIENCY


ENERGY & ATMOSPHERE

WE CREDIT 2: INNOVATIVE WASTEWATER TECHNOLOGIES

Responsible Party: Plumbing Engineer

Intent: To maximize water effi ciency within buildings to reduce the burden on municipal water supply and wastewater systems.

Requirements: Reduce sewage conveyance by 50%.

Status: LACCD Board of Trustees mandates the use of waterless urinals. Combine this strategy with low fl ow toilets and faucets and consider using a graywater system.

Recommended Project Strategy: Utilize Option 1 – reduce potable water use for building sewage conveyance by 50%.

Costs: For graywater and rainwater systems the average cost will range from $4 to $8 per SF. For recommended strategy of using dual plumbing, the cost typically ranges at $1.50 per SF.

Benefi ts: Reduced water consumption.

Payback: With reduced potable water consumption there will be savings on operations with reduced water costs.

Additional Resources: White paper on graywater http://www.awwa.org/fi les/Resources/Wa- terwiser/references/PDFs/GraywaterFinal%20Report2010.pdf

WE CREDIT 3.1/3.2: WATER USE REDUCTION: 20% AND 30%

Responsible Party: Plumbing Engineer

Intent: To maximize water effi ciency within buildings to reduce burdens on municipal water supply and wastewater systems.

• Credit 3.1: 20% Reduction in Interior Water Use from toilets,

urinals, lavatory faucets, showers, kitchen janitorial sinks • Credit 3.2: 30% Reduction (which is an additional 10% savings

above Credit 3.1) • Innovation Credit Potential: 40% Reduction (which is an ad-

ditional 10% savings above Credit 3.2)

Requirements: Employ strategies that together use 20% less water than a water use baseline calculated for the building (not including irrigation). Calculations are based on estimated occupant usage (incorporating FTE) and include only toilets, urinals, lavatory faucets, showers, and kitchen and janitorial sinks. Two points can be earned if the project demonstrates water use 30% below baseline. Three points can be achieved with a 40% reduction from baseline (credit awarded in the Innovation in Design category).

Status: Provide manufacturer, model, and product date sheet of plumbing fi xtures included in design.

Recommended Project Strategy: Flush Fixtures:

• Dual fl ush toilets with 1.28 gallon net per fl ush • Waterless urinals in multi-occupant men’s rooms

Flow Fixtures (based on 80 psi water pressure): • Provide in-line fl ow restrictors (Watermiser or similar) at

point of use to restrict fl ow rates to limits listed below. • Provide showerheads and faucet aerators to match these

fl ow rates at the supplied building water pressure. • Showerheads rated at 1.5 gallon per minute fl ow rate • Kitchen faucet aerators rated at 1.8 gallons per minute • Lavatory faucet aerators rated at 1.0 gallons per minute

• Janitor sinks to be fi tted with foot pedal controls and provided with aerators rated at 2.0 gallons per minute

• Confi rm that selected fi xtures will satisfy end user and maintenance requirements.

Costs: Evaluate costs by manufacturer. Fixtures can be ordered with varying fl ow rates at no additional cost. In-line fl ow restrictors may add a nominal cost increase to the project of less than $5 per item plus cost of installation.

Benefi ts:

• Operational water costs reduced over life of buildings • Lower fuel use for heating hot water • Reduced sewage conveyance • Reduced environmental impacts of wastewater • Effi cient technologies deliver the same level of occupant

service through effi ciency and create conservation opportunities as well as environmentally responsible credibility.

Payback: Typically less than 3 years when water and energy savings are considered.

Energy Design Overview Building energy consumption accounts for 40% of the USA’s carbon footprint. Energy use is a substantial cost of building operation and strategies to reduce consumption are important for the environment and the cost of building operation. A combination of strategies is necessary to reduce energy consumption.

GENERAL ENERGY DESIGN STRATEGIES

E1. HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDING ENVELOPE:

INSULATION

Description: Insulation is one of the most effective ways to improve energy effi ciency. For this project, the following should be considered:

• Roof: R-30 insulation, resulting in an overall U-value of 0.033 Btu/hr-ft2-°F

• Exterior Walls: R-19 insulation, resulting in an overall U- value of 0.036 Btu/hr-ft2-°F

Costs: There is increased soft cost to support an investigation into energy performance. Increased insulation costs will depend on design.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced energy consumption and lower energy bills • Decreases capacity size of the HVAC equipment • Increased thermal comfort (buffers the extremes) and re-

duced mean radiant temperature in occupied spaces

E2. HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDING ENVELOPE: OPTIMIZED SHADING

Description: Building façades should balance daylight, views, and wanted and unwanted heat gain. Consider window awnings or fi xed louvers to

LEED STRATEGIES: WAT ER EFFICIENCY / ENERGY AND ATMOSPHERE


balance these needs for the south and west façades of the building. For the south façade, maintain a cut-off angle of 60 degrees (measured from horizon). Where adequate shading is not provided on the east, west, and south facades, use glass with a lower solar heat gain coeffi cient.

Costs: Exterior shading devices: $150-200 per linear foot of shading device (cost will depend on façade design). Also, analysis to support optimized façade shading will incur soft cost.

Benefi ts: Reduced energy consumption and lower energy bills through effi - cient day-lighting. Decreased capacity size of cooling equipment.

E3. HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDING ENVELOPE: HIGH PERFORMANCE GLAZING

Description: High-performance glazing should be considered for thermal comfort and energy saving potential. The amount of glazing should balance the thermal benefi t of opaque walls with ventilation requirements. Consider limiting glazing to 20 percent of the walls. More may be considered on the south façade if optimized shading is included. Consider super-high-performance glazing with an R-Value of 5 (tri- ple-paned, dual low-e, krypton fi lled) or high performance glazing with an R-value of 3.03 (double-paned, low-e, argon fi lled glazing).

Costs: Costs associated with glazing can vary widely from low to signifi - cant. On average high performance glazing will be around $5 to $10 added cost per SF of glazing area.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced energy consumption and lower energy bills (may impact up to 10% of winter heating energy consumption)

• Decreases capacity size of the HVAC equipment • Increased thermal comfort (buffers the extremes) and re-

duced mean radiant temperature in occupied spaces

E4. VENTILATION

Description: Ventilation design is an important topic affecting both energy consumption and occupant health.

Costs: Operable windows add increased fi rst cost. Further analysis required to support design evolution. Inter-operability controls with mechanical system can add fi rst cost.

Benefi ts:

• Improved air quality without requiring energy • Connection to the outdoors for occupants • Reduced operating costs

ENERGY & ATMOSPHERE CREDIT SUMMARY

EA PREREQUISITE 1: FUNDAMENTAL COMMISSIONING

Responsible Party: Commissioning Agent

Intent: To ensure the building’s energy-related systems are installed and perform in compliance with construction documents.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the owner must engage a Commissioning Agent (CxA) to implement the commissioning process.

Status: LACCD hires Commissioning Agents; this prerequisite will be met.

Recommended Project Strategy: Prior to the start of construction documents, the owner engages a CxA to lead, review and oversee the completion of all commissioning process activities. The following commissioning (Cx) process activities will need to be completed by the Cx team:

• Select an individual as the Commissioning Authority (CxA) to lead, review and oversee the completion of the commissioning process activities.

• The CxA shall be independent of the project’s design and construction management, but may be an employee of the fi rms providing those services or a qualifi ed employee or consultant of the owner.

• The CxA shall report results, fi ndings and recommendations directly to the Owner.

• The Owner shall document the Owner’s Project Require- ments (OPR). The design team shall develop the Basis of Design (BOD). The CxA shall review these documents for clarity and completeness. The Owner and design team shall be responsible for updates to their documents.

• The design team shall develop and incorporate CxA requirements into the construction documents.

• The CxA shall develop & implement a commissioning plan. • The CxA shall verify the installation and performance of the

systems to be commissioned. • The CxA shall complete a commissioning report summary.

Costs: Costs are typically $0.25 to $0.50/sf for fundamental commissioning.

Benefi ts:

• Reduced likelihood of maintenance & resident complaints • Improved building systems quality and performance • Documented building energy savings

Payback: Generally less than 5-years based on energy savings alone.

Additional Resources: Customized commissioning templates can be produced using the Commissioning Assistant Tool available at www.energydesignre- sources.com.

EA PREREQUISITE 2: MINIMUM ENERGY PERFORMANCE

Responsible Party: Mechanical Engineer

Intent: To establish minimum energy effi ciency requirements for the project.

Requirements: To meet the requirements, the design must comply with mandatory and prescriptive provisions of ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004 and also comply with CALGreen 2010 mandatory energy effi ciency provision as well as LACCD sustainable mandatory provision.

Status: Design must meet the credit requirements .

Recommended Project Strategy: To achieve the minimum requirements, provide energy model outputs and results in report format and complete EAc1 LEED submittal template. The energy model will be based on the following criteria:

• Current design exterior wall structure • Current design glazing • Current design lighting layout and selection • Current design and effi ciencies for the HVAC system

Costs: No added cost to the project.

Benefi ts: Improved energy performance reduces consumption and cost.

EA PREREQUISITE 3: FUNDAMENTAL REFRIGERANT MANAGEMENT


Intent: To reduce ozone depletion.

Requirements: To meet the requirements for this credit the design must use no CFC-based refrigerants.

Status: Design must meet the credit requirements

Recommended Project Strategy: Select a HVAC system that uses no CFC-based refrigerants. May use a R410A based refrigerant system meeting credit requirements.

LEED STRATEGIES: ENERGY AND ATMOSPHERE


Costs: No added cost to the project

Benefi ts: Helps the environment by reducing carbon footprint.

Payback: N/A

EA CREDIT 1: OPTIMIZE ENERGY PERFORMANCE

Responsible Party: Team

Intent: To reduce environmental and economic impacts.

Requirements: To meet the requirements, develop a whole building energy model using an approved energy simulation program to demonstrate a minimum 20% energy savings above the Title-24 baseline.

Status: 2 points are mandatory for certifi cation. LACCD Board of Trustees mandates a minimum 20% energy savings above Title-24 baseline.

Recommended Project Strategy: To achieve the required minimum points (20% improvement above Title-24 2005) provide energy model outputs and results in report format and complete EAc1 LEED submittal template. The energy model will be based on the following criteria:

• Current design exterior wall structure • Current design glazing • HVAC system effi ciencies and design

To achieve energy savings above the required minimum develop a whole building energy model based on the following:

• Using high performance glazing • Increased wall and roof insulation values • Increased lighting effi ciency via design and fi xture selection • Radiant heating and cooling via the use of cross-linked

polyethylene (PEX) installed in the fl oor • Renewable energy sources (such as PV arrays).

• Nighttime fl ush-out via the use of mechanized windows • Water Cooled VRF (suggest Daikin VRV, Variable Refriger-

ant Volume, or similar) • For LEED® Platinum consider designing structure to match

the City of Melbourne CH2 Council House which uses multiple strategies including insulation, high performance glazing, chilled beams, renewable energy, natural ventilation, thermal mass and night purging.

Costs: Costs vary depending on the method and systems chosen. Average cost for high performance glazing is a $5 to $10 premium per SF of glazing. Improved insulation can cost up to $2 per SF above R21. Displacement air averages $1 per SF.

Benefi ts:

• Energy cost savings • Reduced HVAC sizing • Reduced lighting fi xture count • Reduced carbon footprint

Payback: The payback can be quite signifi cant on operations with signifi cantly reduced utility costs.

Additional Resources: City of Melbourne CH2 Council House http://www.melbourne.vic. gov.au/Environment/CH2/SeeCH2/Pages/DrawingsDiagrams.aspx

EA CREDIT 2: ON SITE RENEWABLE ENERGY


Intent: To encourage on-site renewable energy self-supply to reduce environmental and economic impacts associated with fossil fuel use.

Requirements: Use on-site renewable energy systems to offset the building energy cost. Performance is expressed as a percentage of the building’s annual energy cost. Building energy use is the cost calculated in EAc1 or the estimated electricity use according to the Dept. of En- ergy Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey database.

Status: Confi rm on-site renewable energy systems will be included in scope.

Recommended Project Strategy: Specify the use of on-site photovoltaic, solar thermal, wind, biomass, or bio-gas technologies to provide energy to the project.

Costs: Costs vary widely depending upon renewable energy sources and methods of harnessing.

Benefi ts: On-site renewable energy reduces the negative environmental impacts of producing and transporting energy generated by coal, nuclear, oil, and natural gas, and can improve overall reliability.

Payback: The payback can be quite signifi cant after the ROI period, wherein all energy harnessed is no added cost to operations and utility costs.

Additional Resources: http://www.helixwind.com/en/, http://www.vqwind.com/, http://www. rehau.com/, www.doe.gov, www.eere.energy.gov

EA CREDIT 3: ENHANCED COMMISSIONING


Intent: To begin the commissioning process early in the design process to provide an opportunity to effect changes in the design, followed by functional testing during and after construction.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the owner needs to have a contract in place with a commissioning agent (CxA) to implement the commissioning process (in addition to the requirements of EAp1).

Status: Project can meet credit requirements as LACCD engages independent commissioning agents.

Recommended Project Strategy: Prior to the start of construction documents the owner engages an independent CxA to lead, review and oversee the completion of all commissioning process activities. The following are required:

• The CxA will assist the owner to develop the Operational Procedures Requirements (OPR).

• The OPR document is developed to assist the design team understand expectations on design and delivery quality.

• The CxA will assist the mechanical engineer to develop a “Basis of Design” for the mechanical / electrical systems.

• The Basis of Design (BOD) document is developed by the design team to assist the owner and review teams in understanding the guiding principles of the design and the building systems proposed.

• The CxA will provide a commissioning section for the specifi cation.

• The CxA will complete a review of the design documents. • The CxA will review contractor submittals to ensure mini-

mum owner’s requirements are met. • The CxA shall assist in the development of a systems man-

ual that provides future operating staff information needed to understand and operate commissioned systems.

• The CxA shall assist in developing requirements for training operating personnel and a building occupant handbook.

• Assure the involvement by the CxA in reviewing operation within 10 months after substantial completion with O&M staff and occupants. Include a plan for resolution of out- standing commissioning-related issues.

• To achieve this credit coordination with EA Prerequisite 1 is necessary.

Costs: Capital costs typically $0.75 to $2.00 per SF.

Benefi ts:

• Reduce maintenance and occupant complaints • Improve building systems quality and performance • Documented building energy savings

Payback: Case studies verify commissioning payback average 3 - 5 years

LEED STRATEGIES: ENERGY AND ATMOSPHERE


MATERIALS & RESOURCES

Additional Resources: Customized commissioning templates can be produced using the Commissioning Assistant Tool available at www.energydesignre- sources.com

EA CREDIT 4: ENHANCED REFRIGERANT MANAGEMENT


Intent: To reduce ozone depletion and support early compliance with the Montreal Protocol, minimizing direct contributions to global warming.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the building’s HVAC and fi re suppression design must use refrigerants that reduce ozone depletion, or use no refrigerants. The base building equipment will comply with the formula as detailed in the LEED-NC Reference Guide.

Status: Confi rm that design can accommodate credit requirements.

Recommended Project Strategy: Provide the required calculations using the current HVAC system design and equipment selection.

Costs: No added cost to the project.

Benefi ts:

• Reduction of ozone-depleting gases • Higher effi ciency equipment • Less stringent maintenance requirements

Payback: In terms of equipment that has increased lifespan there is a payback for not having to replace equipment as regularly.

Additional Resources: See presentation by Trane, crigreen.org/attachment/download/131819.ppt.

EA CREDIT 5: MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION


Intent: To provide monitoring of building energy consumption over time.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the owner approves the development and implementation of a Measurement & Verifi cation Plan (M&V Plan).

Status: Confi rm that design can accommodate credit requirements.


• Develop an M&V Plan to evaluate building and/or energy system performance.

• Confi rm the building energy systems performance through energy simulation or engineering analysis.

• Install metering equipment to measure energy use. • Design a Building Management System (BMS) and install

individual systems metering. • Facilities management to provide Building Management

System (BMS) data after 1 year of operation and reports.

Costs: $10,000 - $20,000 for administration costs to develop and implement plan

Benefi ts:

• Improved facilities management tracking of system performance

• Improved energy management capability

Payback / Additional Resources: N/A

EA CREDIT 6: GREEN POWER

Responsible Party: Owner

Intent: To encourage the development and use of grid-source renewable energy technologies on a net zero pollution basis.

Requirements: Provide at least 35% of the building’s electricity from renewable sources by engaging in at least a two year renewable energy contract (REC) with the service provider.

Status: Purchase renewable energy certifi cates to provide at least 35% of the baseline energy needs.

Recommended Project Strategy: Provide at least 35% of the building’s electricity from renewable sources via REC’s. There is an option of an added ID point for either doubling the renewable energy contract to four years at 35% or increasing a two year renewable energy contract to 70% of the building’s electricity needs.

Costs: Costs vary, on average in the range of $0.02 to $2.00 per kWh.

Benefi ts: Green renewable energy reduces the negative environmental impacts of energy generated by coal, nuclear, oil, and natural gas, including air pollution, water pollution and habitat destruction.

Payback: No payback associated with Green Power purchasing.

Materials & Resources Design Overview When it comes to material selection, the myriad of environmental parameters can seem overwhelming. Each material has its own pros and cons. To navigate this maze, prioritize the selection parameters as they relate to the project.

GENERAL MATERIALS AND

RESOURCES DESIGN STRATEGIES

M1. OCCUPANT RECYCLING PROGRAM

Description: The EPA estimated in 2005 that Americans generate 4.5 lbs of waste per person per day. Provide a centralized space and containers for the storage and pick-up of recyclables (paper, plastic, metal, glass, and cardboard at a minimum). Consider fi re safety and pest control at recycling storage, and signage to aid in recycling.

Costs: Minimal increased capital cost to provide infrastructure for recycling.

Benefi ts:

• Landfi ll avoidance • Resource conservation

M2. RECYCLED CONTENT

Description: Use materials with a high percentage of recycled, and especially post-consumer, content. The following list includes readily available materials that contain recycled content:

• Parking bumpers • Site furniture • Concrete Reinforcement • Structural Steel • Concrete*

LEED STRATEGIES: ENERGY & ATMOSPHERE / MATERIALS & RESOURCES


• Metal Decking • Cold-Formed Metal Framing • Composite Wood/Fiber Products • Building Insulation • Metal Siding and Roofi ng • Steel Doors and Frames • Gypsum Board

Costs:

Big-leaf Maple; Hard Maple; Alder; Birch; Beech; Tan oak; Myrtlewood; Chinkapin; Walnut (Claro, Black &, English) and Aspen.

• Tropical Hardwoods: Mahogany; Ipe; Spanish Cedar; Santa Maria; Machiche, Pucte; Santa Maria; Chechen Negro; Mano de Leon; Jobillo; Ramon Blanco.

MATERIALS & RESOURCES CREDIT

SUMMARY

MR PREREQUISITE 1: STORAGE AND COLLECTION

OF MATERIALS

MR CREDITS 1.1/1.2: BUILDING REUSE: MAINTAIN 75%/95% OF EXISTING FLOORS, WALLS, ROOF


This credit cannot be pursued -- no buildings are being reused.

• Ceramic Tile • Acoustic Ceilings • Resilient Flooring • Carpeting • Paints and Coatings

*Replacing a portion of the Portland cement in concrete with a product such as fl y ash, slag, mill scale, or rice hull ash not only reuses industrial waste products but signifi cantly reduces the embodied energy of concrete. Fly ash substitution for 15-35% of the cement is common; up to 70% is possible in some applications. Coordinate specifi cations with the structural engineer and/or pre-cast manufacturer.

Costs: Vary depending on products and applications.

Benefi ts:

• Landfi ll avoidance • Resource conservation (materials and energy) • Potential reduced costs

M3. SUSTAINABLE WOOD

Description: When using wood, choose salvaged, recycled, or at least Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certifi ed wood whenever possible, especially if tropical woods must be used.

• Salvaged: Salvaged timber and wood products such as fl ooring, posts and beams are available.

• Recycled: Engineered wood products can be specifi ed with recycled content.

• FSC Certifi ed: The following are some of the species that are available with FSC certifi cation: • Softwoods: Douglas Fir; Western Red Cedar; Incense

Cedar; Spruce; Redwood; Ponderosa Pine; Lodgepole Pine; Hem-Fir.

• Hardwoods: White Oak; Red Oak; Pacifi c Madrone;

May be a 5-10 percent premium on new wood products. Increased fi rst cost can be reduced by including certifi ed lumber in the project from the earliest stages and making early contact with the local mills and suppliers to let them know the project needs.

Benefi ts: Ecosystem protection

M4. CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT

Description: The construction process for any project is a signifi cant source of waste, even when it is new construction. The SGEC should target a minimum 75 percent of construction waste for recycling and salvage. A Construction Waste Management Plan must be developed before demolition begins. Additionally per General Conditions of LACCD contracts, a minimum of 90% of marketable materials are to be diverted from landfi ll and recycled.

Costs: Cost is not applicable as C&D waste management is also required by CALGreen, AB32, and LACCD General Conditions.

Benefi ts: Elimination of tipping fees and landfi ll avoidance.

Responsible Party: Architect/Owner

Intent: To facilitate the reduction of waste generated by building occupants that is hauled to and disposed of in landfi lls.

Requirements: Provide an area for collection and storage of non-hazardous materials for recycling (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics & metals, easily accessible and serving the entire building.

Status: This is a mandatory prerequisite.

Recommended Project Strategy: Designate space for the collection of recyclables and storage that is appropriately sized and located in a convenient area. Consider employing recycling chutes, cardboard balers, aluminum can crushers and other technologies to enhance the recycling program.

Costs: Generally costs are not signifi cant. Equipment such as can crushers may have an initial cost but minimize space required for recycling.

Benefi ts: Increases tenant recycling, reduces demand for virgin resources.

Payback: No payback from general recycling. However, activities such as cardboard baling, reusing coffee grounds for landscape aeration, and innovative recycling approaches can be sources of income.

Additional Resources: http://www.p2pays.org/ref/01/00012.htm

MR CREDIT 1.3: BUILDING REUSE: 50% OF INTERIOR NON-STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS


This credit cannot be pursued -- no buildings are being reused,

MR CREDITS 2.1/2.2: WASTE MANAGEMENT: DIVERT 50%/75% FROM LANDFILL

Responsible Party: Contractors

Intent: To divert construction waste from landfi ll disposal and incinerators, redirect recyclable material back to the manufacturing process, and redirect reusable materials to appropriate sites.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the General Contractor must develop and implement a waste management plan that, at a minimum, identifi es the materials to be diverted from disposal and whether they will be sorted on-site or commingled. All contractors must recycle and/ or salvage at least 50% of non-hazardous construction material for Credit 2.1 and at least 75% for Credit 2.2. Excavated soil and land- clearing debris do not count. Calculations can be done by weight (tons) or volume (cubic yards), but must be consistent throughout.

Status: Confi rm that 75% recycling/diversion rate can be achieved. Gen- eral Conditions of all LACCD contracts mandate a minimum of 90% construction and demolition waste be diverted from landfi ll. Ergo it is suggested to aim for 95% to 100% diversion rate and receive an ID point for Exemplary Performance in this credit.

LEED STRATEGIES: MATERIALS & RESOURCES


Recommended Project Strategy: • Establish goals for landfi ll diversion and incinerators, and

adopt a construction waste management plan to achieve these goals. Consider recycling cardboard, metals, brick, acoustical tile, concrete, plastic, clean wood, glass, gypsum, wallboard, carpet, and insulation.

• Designate a specifi c area on the construction site for recycling and track recycling efforts throughout construction.

• Identify construction haulers and recyclers to handle the designated materials. Diversion may include donation of materials to charitable organizations.

Costs: Cost savings can be realized through reduced landfi ll tipping fees.

Benefi ts: Reduced pressure on landfi lls and less demand for virgin resources.

Payback: There would be a payback in terms of reduced landfi ll tipping fees.

Additional Resources: The Sourcebook for Green and Sustainable Building provides guidance on construction waste management: www.greenbuilder.com/ sourcebook/ConstructionWaste.html

MR CREDITS 3.1/3.2: MATERIALS REUSE: 5%/10%


This credit will likely not be pursued.

MR CREDITS 4.1/4.2: RECYCLED CONTENT: 10%/20%


Intent: To increase demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials, therefore reducing impacts resulting from extrac- tion and processing of new virgin materials.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the Architect must specify materials with high levels of recycled content for items having the highest impact on materials cost in the project. Pre-consumer recycled content receives half credit. The calculation for credit achievement is:

• Post-consumer* + ½ Pre-consumer8 = 10% of the total value of the materials in the project

• Post-consumer + ½ Pre-consumer = 20% of the total value of the materials in the project

* “Post-consumer” is waste generated by households or commercial and industrial facilities as end-users. “Pre-consumer” is material diverted from the waste stream during manufacturing; excluded is re-utilization of materials such as rework, regrind or scrap generated in a process and capable of being reclaimed within that process.

Status: Credit requirements to be refl ected in design.


• Establish a project goal for recycled content materials and identify suppliers to achieve this goal. This relates to materials in CSI MasterFormat 1995 divisions 2 through 10.

• Concrete, reinforcing bars, light steel framing and gypsum board will be large parts of the total materials cost. Investigate the acceptability of some recycled aggregate in concrete mixes. Obtain data on pre- and post-consumer recycled content of rebar, framing, and gypsum board.

• Determine the next top ten items by costs in the preliminary budget and explore products that contain recycled content.

• Architect to include recycled content material in specifi cations and estimates.

• During construction, Contractor to ensure that the specifi ed recycled content materials are installed and quantify the total percentage of recycled content materials installed.

Costs: Generally no added cost impact with careful selection of materials. Concrete and steel have high recycled content values. With proper specifi cation steel can be up to 90% recycled content, and concrete can utilize recycled content such as fl y ash and recycled aggregate.

Benefi ts: Reduced demand for virgin resources.

Payback: No payback associated.

Additional Resources: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/RCP/Search.asp

MR CREDITS 5.1/5.2: REGIONAL MATERIALS: 10%/20%


Intent: To increase demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured in the region, supporting use of indigenous resources and reducing environmental impacts from transportation.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the Team must use building materials and products that have been extracted, harvested or recovered and manufactured within 500 miles of the project site for a minimum of 10% (based on cost) of total materials value. Mechanical, electrical and plumbing components are not included in credit calculations.



• Team to establish a project goal for locally sourced materials and identify materials and suppliers to achieve this goal.

• Architect to include regional material in specifi cations and estimates.

• During construction, Contractor to ensure that the specifi ed local materials are installed and quantify the total percentage of local materials installed. This environmental attri- bute is related to materials in Divisions 2 through 10.

Costs: Cost varies widely dependent upon strategy.

Benefi ts: Reduced transportation impacts, supporting local companies.


Additional Resources: N/A

MR CREDIT 6: RAPIDLY RENEWABLE MATERIALS


Intent: To reduce the use of fi nite raw and long-cycle renewable materials.

Requirements: Use rapidly renewable materials (plants that are harvested within a ten-year cycle) for 2.5% of the total value of all the building materials and products used for the project, based on cost.


Recommended Project Strategy: Defi ne goals for using rapidly renewable materials such as bamboo, wool, cotton insulation, linoleum, wheatboard, strawboard, and cork.

Costs: With careful specifi cation cost impact should be negligible, refl ected in the soft cost of documentation associated with this credit.

Benefi ts: Rapidly renewable resources are environmentally responsible as they require less land to grow. Materials harvested irresponsibly lead to habitat destruction, soil erosion and stream sedimentation.


Additional Resources: http://www.forbofl ooringna.com/Commercial/Products/Marmoleum/ Marmoleum-Global-3/

LEED STRATEGIES: MATERIALS & RESOURCES


MR CREDIT 7: CERTIFIED WOOD


Intent: To encourage environmentally responsible forest management.

Requirements: Use a minimum of 50% of wood-based materials and products that are certifi ed in accordance with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Principles and Criteria, including framing, fl ooring, sub-fl ooring, doors, and fi nishes.


Recommended Project Strategy: Generally the cost of the materials is not the barrier to obtaining this credit, but using suffi cient material to meet the credit threshold. If the structure will likely be mainly concrete and steel, consider the use of FSC certifi ed wood for fl ooring and fi nishes.

Costs: Costs for FSC certifi ed wood vary signifi cantly based on the type of wood specifi ed.

Benefi ts: The Forest Stewardship Council encourages responsible forestry practices to improve the health of forest ecosystems by reducing the destruction of forests, loss of habitat, soil erosion, and stream sedimentation.



INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Indoor Environmental Quality Design Overview High-occupant use requires not only adequate ventilation, but also special attention to internal loads from computers and people. The aspects of Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) include views, daylight and thermal comfort, visual comfort and glare, and acoustical comfort and safety.

GENERAL INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY DESIGN STRATEGIES

I1. MANUALLY OPERABLE WINDOWS

Description: Optimize the effectiveness of operable windows. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) standard 62.1 recommends a minimum operable area of 4 percent of fl oor area and that all areas are within 25 feet of the window perimeter for natural ventilation. Attempt to mediate issues of security, odors, noise, or other deterrents to window use.

Costs: Costs depend upon a variety of factors, including size, type of window, window frame material, type of glass, etc.

Benefi ts: Reduces energy use on temperate days. Initial analysis indicates a signifi cant benefi t for natural ventilation for this project combined with other systems. Operable windows provide good ventilation, a connection to the outdoors, and the ability to control one’s local thermal environment.

I2. LOW VOC MATERIALS

Description: Designers should select low-emitting materials. Composite wood products should be urea-formaldehyde free. Specify paints and fi nishes with low VOC levels in compliance with the standards

listed below. Carpet installed in the building interior should meet the testing and product requirements of the Carpet and Rug Insti- tute’s Green Label program. Adhesives, sealants and sealant primers should comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule #1168. Aerosol adhesives should comply with the Green Seal Standard for Commercial Adhesives GS-36. Architectural paints, coatings and primers applied to interior walls and ceilings should comply with Green Seal Standard GS-11, and anti-corrosive and anti-rust paints applied to interior ferrous metal substrates: should comply with Green Seal Standard GC-03. Clear wood fi nishes, fl oor coatings, stains, and shellacs applied to interior elements should comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1113.

Costs: Including these performance requirements into the earliest stages of design typically allows them to be met without adding capital cost.

Benefi ts: Reduced level of off-gassing initially and over time, which enhances the indoor air quality and reduces the potential for chemical sensitivity responses.

I3. OUTDOOR AIR DELIVERY MONITORING

Description: Install a CO2 alarm in the breathing zone for each multi-occupant space (classroom and multipurpose rooms). Additional airfl ow sensors to measure outdoor air must be provided to ensure adequate outdoor air is provided for all AHUs (Air Handling Unit).

Costs: The sensors will add capital cost to the project. ROM cost is $300- 450 installed per sensor.

Benefi ts: Aids the integration of natural ventilation and mechanical ventilation by providing user feedback in the space.

I4. POST-CONSTRUCTION FLUSH OUT

Description: The construction process produces signifi cant indoor air contamination, and building material off-gassing tends to be exponentially higher the newer the material. Therefore, construction pollutants should be removed before building occupants arrive. After construction and prior to occupancy, fl ush-out the indoor air. It is recommended to supply a total volume of 14,000 cubic feet of outdoor air per square foot of fl oor area while maintaining an internal temperature of at least 60 degrees and relative humidity no higher than 60 percent.

Costs: This approach does not necessarily add capital cost. Depending on the time of year, heating and cooling of ventilation air would consume energy. The time required for fl ush-out should be incorporated into the construction and occupancy schedule.

Benefi ts: Reduced level of pollutants enhances the indoor air quality and reduces the potential for chemical sensitivity responses.

I5. HEALTHY MATERIALS

Description: Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBTs) are toxic chemicals that do not break down easily in nature but remain in animal tissue and accumulate as they move up the food chain, creating a growing health problem for the ecosystem, including humans. Avoid materials whose manufacture, use, or disposal releases PBTs, such as: • Chlorinated materials such as PVC (or vinyl) and Polychlo-

roprene (or Neoprene) • PBT based material treatments such as:

• Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs), especially polybrominated diphenyl ether found in furniture foam and fabrics

• Perfl uorochemicals (PFCs), especially PFOA found in many stain and non-stick treatments

• Toxic heavy metals such as: • Mercury: in thermostats, switches and light bulbs • Lead: in fl ashing, solder, roofi ng, wire insulation

LEED STRATEGIES: MATERIALS & RESOURCES / INDOOR AIR QUALITY


• Wood preserved with chromium copper arsenic (CCA), creosote, or pentachlorophenol

• Instead of PVC piping, consider cast iron or polyethylene (LDPE and HDPE.)

• Consider TPO instead of PVC membrane roofi ng. • Consider rubber, wood, or ceramic tile, instead of vinyl

baseboard. • Consider linoleum or ceramic tile instead of VCT fl oors. • Avoid vinyl siding. • Use low-mercury fl uorescent light bulbs wherever possible.

Costs: Very rarely do these materials add any signifi cant capital cost to the project. TPO membrane roofi ng is often less cost than PVC.

Benefi ts: Healthier environment, increased worker and student productivity.

INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

CREDIT SUMMARY

EQ PREREQUISITE 1: MINIMUM IAQ PERFORMANCE


Intent: To establish minimum indoor air quality performance to enhance the indoor air quality of the building.

Requirements: Meet the minimum requirements of Sections 4 through 7 of ASHRAE 62.1, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality.

Status: This is a mandatory prerequisite. Design shall meet ASHRAE 62.1

Recommended Project Strategy: Design according to the required ventilation rates.

Costs: Typically no additional cost.

Benefi ts: Improved occupant comfort.



EQ PREREQUISITE 2: ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE CONTROL


Intent: To minimize exposure of building occupants, indoor surfaces, and ventilation air distribution systems to environmental tobacco smoke.

Requirements: This project will likely pursue Option 1 which prohibits smoking in the building and in exterior areas at least 25 feet away from entries, outdoor intakes, and operable windows.

Status: This is a mandatory prerequisite.

Recommended Project Strategy: Prohibit smoking in the building. Allow limited exterior smoking areas at least 25 feet from entries, air intakes, and operable windows.

Costs: No additional cost.




EQ CREDIT 1: OUTDOOR AIR DELIVERY MONITORING


Intent: To provide capacity for ventilation system monitoring to help sustain occupant comfort and well-being.

Requirements: Install permanent monitoring systems that provide feedback on ventilation system performance to ensure systems maintain design minimum ventilation requirements. An alarm shall sound when conditions vary by 10% of more from the set point.

Status: Design shall meet credit requirements.

Recommended Project Strategy: Design monitoring systems in accordance with credit requirements.

Costs: As the project should have a BMS system as required by ELAC Campus Standards and LACCD requirements, the added cost for the sensors is minimal, up to $1.00 per SF.




EQ CREDIT 2: INCREASED VENTILATION


Intent: To provide outdoor air ventilation to improve indoor air quality for improved occupant comfort and well being.

Requirements: For mechanically ventilated spaces, increase breathing zone outdoor ventilation rates to all occupied spaces by at least 30% above the minimum rates required by ASHRAE Standard 62.1. It is as- sumed the SGEC building will not utilize natural ventilation only.


Recommended Project Strategy: Design to meet ventilation requirements.

Costs: Typically little to no hard cost, but additional soft costs associated with building operation when outdoor air temperatures are signifi - cantly different from required indoor temperatures.




EQ CREDIT 3.1: IAQ MANAGEMENT PLAN: DURING CONSTRUCTION

Responsible Party: Contractor

Intent: To reduce indoor air quality issues resulting from construction for the comfort and well-being of workers and building occupants.

Requirements: Develop and implement an IAQ Management Plan for the construction and pre-occupancy phases of the building that includes:

• Control measures based on fi ve common construction practice areas

• Protection of stored on-site or installed absorptive materials from moisture damage

LEED STRATEGIES: INDOOR AIR QUALITY


• No usage of permanently installed air handlers during the construction period OR

• Replacement of all fi ltration media immediately prior to occupancy if permanently installed air handlers are used during construction, specifying that fi ltration media with a MERV 8 to be used at each return air grille.

Status: Sequence of operations and GC team shall meet requirements.

Recommended Project Strategy: Develop an Indoor Air Quality Management Plan based on standard template. Review the following list of suggested common control measures and include all feasible options in the Plan:

HVAC protection

• Protect HVAC equipment to prevent construction debris from entering ductwork and spaces

• Seal all duct and equipment openings with plastic • Do not use HVAC equipment during construction, or, if

used, replace fi lters prior to occupancy

Source control • Reduce introduction of airborne contaminants and emitting

materials • Specify Low or No VOC paints, adhesives, sealants, and

materials • Maintain a clean and dry storage and construction site

Pathway interruption

• Prevent migration of contaminants through building during construction

• Ventilate during installation of VOC-emitting materials • Install temporary physical barriers between work activities

that produce airborne contaminants and non-work area

Housekeeping • Frequently clean to remove construction dust and debris • Immediately clean up spills or accumulated water

Scheduling

• Include adequate time for replacement of fi lter media prior

to occupancy • Stagger installation of emitting materials and materials that

can absorb VOCs during construction. • Coordinate with construction team in the beginning order to

minimize or eliminate scheduling delays

Other • Include a declaration that all on-site or installed absorptive

materials will be protected from moisture • Determine whether or not permanently installed air han-

dlers will be used during construction. If they will, specify that MERV 8 fi lters or better will be used at each return grill and will be replaced immediately prior to occupancy.

• Develop a schedule to photograph and highlight implemented construction IAQ practices (i.e. protected absorptive materials, duct and equipment openings sealed with plastic, temporary barriers, etc.).

To achieve additional credits. coordinate with EQ Credits 3.2 and 5 to determine appropriate specifi cations and schedules for fi ltration media

Costs: Soft costs for documentation and management, generally minimal.

Benefi ts: Contaminant reduction is benefi cial to construction team and building occupants in terms of greater comfort and productivity. Source control of construction materials minimizes or eliminates future issues with moisture, mold, etc.


Additional Resources: Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association, Inc. (SMACNA): www.smacna.org for a comprehensive discussion of the sources of pollutants, measurement, methods of control and management techniques.

EQ CREDIT 3.2: IAQ MANAGEMENT PLAN: BEFORE OCCUPANCY

Responsible Party: Contractor

Intent: To reduce indoor air quality issues resulting from construction in order to sustain the comfort and well-being of construction workers and building occupants.

Requirements: To meet the requirements for this credit, choose an option:

Option 1 -- Flush Out

Pre-occupancy: After construction ends, prior to occupancy and with all interior fi nishes installed perform a building fl ush-out by supplying a total volume of 14,000 cu. ft. of outdoor air per SF of fl oor area while maintaining a temperature of at least 60 degrees and relative humidity no higher than 60%.

Early occupancy: If occupancy is desired before fl ush out is complete, the space may be occupied following delivery of at least 3,500 cu.ft. of outdoor air per sq.ft. of fl oor area. After the space is occupied, it must be ventilated at a minimum of 0.30 cfm/sq.ft. of outside air or the design minimum outside air rate determined in EQp1, whichever is greater. Ventilation must begin a minimum of three hours prior to occupancy each day of the fl ush-out period and continue during occupancy until a total of 14,000 cu.ft./sq.ft. of outside air has been delivered.

Option 2 -- Air Testing Conduct baseline IAQ testing after construction and prior to occupancy using testing protocols consistent with the EPA Compendium of Methods for Determination of Air Pollutants in Indoor Air. Dem- onstrate that the contaminant maximum concentrations listed in Ap- pendix B are not exceeded. Conduct additional fl ush out and retest until maximum concentration requirements are met.

Status: Sequence of operations and GC team shall meet credit requirements.

Recommended Project Strategy: Option 2 – Air Testing is the suggested path to achieving this credit.

Contract with a service provider for IAQ Testing services, including a copy of the project’s Indoor Air Quality testing report, after construction completion. To achieve additional credits, coordinate with EQ Credits 3.1 and 5 to determine the appropriate specifi cations and schedules for fi ltration media.

Costs: Costs generally range from $0.25 to $0.50 per SF.

Benefi ts: Contaminant reduction is benefi cial to construction team and building occupants in terms of greater comfort and productivity. Source control of construction materials minimizes or eliminates future issues with moisture, mold, etc.


Additional Resources: Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association, Inc. (SMACNA): www.smacna.org for a comprehensive discussion of the sources of pollutants, measurement, methods of control and management techniques.

EQ CREDITS 4.1 - 4.4: LOW EMITTING MATERIALS & ADHESIVES


Intent: To reduce the quantity of indoor air contaminants that are odorous, irritating, and/or harmful to the comfort and well-being of installers and occupants.

Requirements: Credit 4.1: Adhesives & Sealants applied on the interior of the building: Adhesives, sealants and sealant primers must be less than the referenced VOC limits outlined in South Coast Air Quality Manage- ment District (SCAQMD) rule #1168 and the Green Seal Standard for Commercial Adhesives GS-36.

Credit 4.2: Paints & Coatings applied on the interior of the building:



Paints, coatings, clear wood fi nishes, fl oor coatings, stains, sealers, EQ CREDIT 5: INDOOR CHEMICAL & POLLUTANT EQ CREDIT 6.1: CONTROLLABILITY OF SYSTEMS: Requirements: and shellacs applied to interior elements shall not exceed the refer- SOURCE CONTROL LIGHTING Provide individual controls for 50% minimum of building occupantsenced VOC and chemical component limits outlined in Green Seal that enables adjustments to suit individual task needs/preferences.Standard GS-11 and GC-03 also reference SCAQMD rule #1113.

Credit 4.3: Carpet Systems: All carpet shall meet the testing and product requirements of the Carpet and Rug Institute’s Green La- bel Plus program. Carpet adhesives must meet requirements of EQ Credit 4.1.

Credit 4.4 Composite Wood & Agrifi ber Products: Composite wood and agrifi ber must not contain added urea-formaldehyde resins.


Recommended Project Strategy: Based on referenced composition limits,investigate local availability of approved or equivalent adhesives, sealants, paints and coatings. Investigate local availability of approved or equivalent carpet systems that meet referenced emission rate factors of micrograms of contaminant per square meter of carpet per hour, and composite wood products with no added urea formaldehyde resins.

To achieve additional credits, coordinate requirements for MRc4 and EQc4.3 as many carpet products are applicable for both points.

Costs: Costs vary but are generally minimal.

Benefi ts: VOCs have a detrimental effect on human health, agricultural crops, forests, and ecosystems; limiting them reduces sources of pollutants during construction and in the fi nished building.


Additional Resources: http://www.epa.gov/iaq/voc.html


Intent: To minimize exposure of building occupants to potentially hazardous particulates and chemical pollutants.

Requirements:

• Employ permanent entryway systems at least 6 feet in length in the primary direction of travel at entries directly connected to the outdoors and regularly used.

• In areas where hazardous gases or chemicals are present or used (i.e. garages, housekeeping/laundry and copying/ printing areas), exhaust each room suffi ciently to create negative pressure with respect to adjacent spaces with the doors to the room closed. For these spaces provide deck to deck partitions, a hard lid ceiling, and self closing doors.

• In mechanically ventilated buildings provide regularly occupied areas of the building with air fi ltration media of MERV 13 or better and fi lter both return and outside air that is delivered as supply air.


Recommended Project Strategy: Comply with requirements and design accordingly.

Costs: For permanent entryway systems, the cost is on average $1000 per entry way. The fi lters represent minimal added cost.

Benefi ts: Improved occupant health.



Responsible Party: Electrical Engineer

Intent: To provide a high level of lighting system control by individual occupants or by specifi c groups in multi-occupant spaces.

Requirements: Provide individual lighting controls for 90% minimum of the building occupants to enable adjustments to suit individual task needs and preferences. Provide lighting system controllability for all shared multi-occupant spaces to enable lighting adjustment that meets group needs and preferences.


Recommended Project Strategy: Design project to meet the requirements of this credit.

Costs: On average, lighting controls cost $0.50 per SF.




EQ CREDIT 6.2: CONTROLLABILITY OF SYSTEMS: THERMAL COMFORT


Intent: To provide a high level of thermal comfort system control by individu- als or by specifi c groups in multi-occupant spaces.

Provide comfort systems controls for all shared multi-occupant spaces that enable adjustments to suit group needs/preferences.


Recommended Project Strategy: Design according to requirements.

Costs: On average the cost for thermal comfort controls is $2.00 per SF.

Benefi ts: Improved occupant comfort and health.

Payback: Reduced energy bills and operation costs.


EQ CREDIT 7.1: THERMAL COMFORT: DESIGN


Intent: To provide a comfortable thermal environment to support the productivity and well-being of building occupants.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the design of HVAC systems and the building envelope need to meet the requirements of ASHRAE 55-2004, Thermal Comfort Conditions for Human Occupancy and demonstrate design compliance in accordance with 6.1.1 Documentation.



• Determine the approach to thermal comfort within the proj-



ect space based on ASHRAE 55-2004: • Active Conditioning (e.g. mechanical HVAC systems) • Passive Conditioning (e.g. natural ventilation) • Establish seasonal temperature and humidity design cri-

teria. Using ASHRAE 55-2004 as a reference, identify the environmental parameters required to maintain the desired thermal comfort and choose suitable conditioning systems. Use a HVAC load calculation method (including lighting systems and other internal loads) to assist in sizing and selecting HVAC equipment.

• Determine the operating setpoints and parameters of the HVAC system.

• Provide a narrative describing the method used to establish the thermal comfort conditions for the project and how the system addresses the design criteria. Include specifi c information regarding compliance with the referenced standard.

• To achieve additional credits, coordinate with EQc7.2 Ther- mal Comfort – Verifi cation.

Costs: Dependent on approach.

Benefi ts: Building conditioning systems, including active HVAC systems and natural ventilation systems, enhance thermal comfort for building occupants and add to indoor air quality and ventilation.

Payback: Reduced energy consumption and savings on operations.


EQ CREDIT 7.2: THERMAL COMFORT: VERIFICATION


Intent: To assess and maintain the building thermal comfort over time. This credit is dependent upon EQ credit 7.1.

Requirements: To meet the requirements the project team must:

• Design and distribute a thermal comfort survey of building occupants within a period of 6 to 18 months after occupancy. This survey must collect anonymous responses about thermal comfort in the building and meet all of the referenced requirements.

• Develop and implement a plan for corrective action if the survey results indicate that more than 20% of occupants are dissatisfi ed with thermal comfort in the building. This plan should include a measurement of relevant environmental variables in problem areas in accordance with ASHRAE Standard 55-2004.


Recommended Project Strategy: Determine the approach to thermal comfort within the project space based on ASHRAE 55-2004:

• Develop a narrative that includes: • Description of the survey, including the proposed time

of administration (within 6 to 18 months after occupancy) and the method of administration (in-person, over the phone, over networked computers, or via mail)

• A corrective action plan that addresses any thermal comfort issues resulting from the survey. Corrective actions typically include control adjustments (temperature setpoints, schedules, operating modes), diffuser airfl ow adjustments, and solar controls.

• Design the survey to include: • Satisfaction with thermal environment posed in a 7

point scale running from very satisfi ed (+3) to very dissatisfi ed (-3) with the center (0) signifying the neutral.

• The approximate location of survey respondents by building zone or exact location voluntarily

• Follow-up questions for respondents that indicate dis- satisfaction in order to identify the nature and cause of the problem and provide corrective action.

• Coordinate with EQc7.1. EQc7.2 cannot be achieved if EQc7.1 is not awarded.

Costs: Minimal cost associated with design and distribution of survey and synthesis of results. Monitoring, managing, and maintaining thermal comfort conditions may increase building operating costs slightly.

Benefi ts: Monitoring, managing, and maintaining thermal comfort conditions may decrease building operating costs slightly. Reducing thermal comfort problems and complaints contributes to occupant well-being and may allow operations and maintenance staff more time to address other critical areas.

Payback: N/A

Additional Resources: The Center for the Built Environment at UC Berkeley offers a web- based survey that satisfi es credit requirements and is easily administered to occupants: www.cbe.berkeley.edu/research/survey.htm

EQ CREDIT 8.1: DAYLIGHT & VIEWS: DAYLIGHT 75%


Intent: To provide building occupants a connection between indoors and outdoors through daylight and views in regularly-occupied spaces.

Requirements: Option 2 is suggested: demonstrate via computer simulation that a minimum daylight illumination level of 25 fc has been achieved in a minimum of 75% of the regularly occupied spaces.


Recommended Project Strategy: Design so that at least 75% of regularly occupied spaces have day- lighting of 25fc.

Costs: Small added cost for calculations related to the credit requirements.

Benefi ts: Improved occupant well being and connection to the outdoors.

Payback: N/A

Additional Resources: Radiance software can be downloaded for free: http://radsite.lbl.gov/ deskrad/download.htm

EQ CREDIT 8.2: DAYLIGHT & VIEWS: VIEWS 90%


Intent: To provide building occupants a connection between indoors and outdoors through daylight and views in regularly-occupied spaces.

Requirements: Achieve direct line of sight to the outdoors via vision glazing between 2’6” and 7’6” above the fi nished fl oor for building occupants in 90% of all regularly occupied areas.


Recommended Project Strategy: Design project to comply with requirements.

Costs: Costs can vary from minimal to signifi cant depending on design.

Benefi ts: Improved occupant well being and connection to the outdoors.

Payback: N/A




INNOVATION & DESIGN PROCESS

Innovation & Design Overview Innovation & Design Process incorporates strategies which relate to innovation in design, exemplary performance in some credit categories, or a new and innovative approach. Topics include, but are not limited to, transportation, pedestrian connectivity and safety, habitat conservation, open space, site disturbance, light pollution, surface hydrology, storm water management, acoustics, indoor air quality, energy performance, renewable energy, and waste diversion.

The Innovation & Design credits are left open to the Design/Build Team. Following is a short summary of potential strategies, but this does not preclude other strategies the Team may choose.

GENERAL DESIGN STRATEGIES

ID1. GREEN CLEANING PROGRAM

Description: A green cleaning program will reduce exposure of building occupants and maintenance personnel to potentially hazardous chemical contaminants that adversely impact air quality, occupant well-being, and the environment.

Costs: There is no anticipated increase in capital cost for this strategy.

Benefi ts: Increased health for occupants and maintenance personnel.

ID2. KIOSK AND SIGNAGE GREEN EDUCATION PROGRAM

Description: Green Education is important in promoting green building practices and heightening public awareness of sustainability. By using the project and its buildings as a teaching tool to provide public education focusing on green building strategies and solutions, this can help to establish an educational program that is actively instructional.

Costs: The costs associated with this strategy vary depending on number of signs and complexity of kiosk content.

Benefi ts: Provides an educational and visual link to useful environmental data and raises awareness of sustainability.

ID3. EXEMPLARY PERFORMANCE

Description: An innovation point can be earned for exemplary performance in selected credits. For example, by reaching a 40% threshold in WE credit 3.2, an additional innovation point can be earned. Credits that are available for an innovation credit are:

• SS Credit 2 • SS Credit 4.1 • SS Credit 4.2 • SS Credit 4.3 • SS Credit 4.4 • SS Credit 5.1 • SS Credit 5.2 • SS Credit 7.1 • SS Credit 7.2 • WE Credit 2 • WE Credit 3 • MR Credit 3 • MR Credit 4 • MR Credit 5 • MR Credit 6 • MR Credit 7 • EA Credit 6 • EQ Credit 8.1 • EQ Credit 8.2

Costs: Costs vary depending on credit and strategy chosen.

Benefi ts: Benefi ts vary widely depending on credit and strategy.

LEED STRATEGIES: INNOVATION & DESIGN PROCESS


LEED-NC Version 2.2 Project Checklist

2525 Firestone Blvd, City of Southgate, CA

East LA College - Satellite Campus Project "South Gate Educational

Center" LEED Gold Scenario "A" Yes ?

Yes ?

10

2

Sustainable Sites

14 Points

COST ANALYSIS

AVERAGE COST

PAYBACK PERIOD

SAVINGS CAPTURED PER ANNUM AFTER PAYBACK PERIOD

Yes ?

11

5

Energy & Atmosphere

17 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Y

Prereq 1

Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems

Required

The cost for this is incurred by college as the commissioning agent is hired by college.

$

- There is payback in terms of increased proficiencies of systems.

$ -

Y

Prereq 2

Minimum Energy Performance

Required

No added cost as project must attain minimum energy performance.

$

-

Payback period is difficult to define as this credit relates to multiple systems and energy efficiency measures.

$ -

Y

Prereq 3

Fundamental Refrigerant Management

Required There is no cost impact by utilizing refrigerants that meet this requirement.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

5

5

Credit 1

Optimize Energy Performance

1 to 10

Cost varies widely dependent upon strategies chosen to achieve energy savings.

$

-

Varies dependent upon energy savings, however there will be cost savings in operations with reduced energy costs.

$ -

3

Credit 2.1

On-Site Renewable Energy

1 to 3

Cost varies widely dependent upon method and means chosen for renewable energy source.

$

-


$ -

1

Credit 3

Enhanced Commissioning

1


$

-

There will be operational savings for systems running at peak calibrations.

$ -

1

Credit 4

Enhanced Refrigerant Management

1

No added cost.

$

-There will be operational savings for systems with increased life spans.

$ -

1

Credit 5

Measurement & Verification

1

Costs range from $10,000 to $20,000, see narrative.

$

15,000Operational savings related to energy systems performing properly.

$ -

Credit 6 Green Power

1 $ - $ -

LEED SCORECARD: GOLD SCENARIO ‘A’

3

2

Water Efficiency

5 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


1

Credit 1.1 Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50%

1 There is no added cost with careful selection of plant species.

$

-Reduced operational cost with reduced potable water demand.

$ -

1

Credit 1.2

Water Efficient Landscaping, No Potable Use or No Irrigation

1

Initial cost varies, however careful selection of plant species and no irrigation system infrastructure has cost savings associated.

$

Savings related to no irrigation system infrastructure.

$ -

1

Credit 2

Innovative Wastewater Technologies

1

There is no added cost as the Board mandates the use of waterless urinals, for a complimentary strategy cost can vary widely. Please see narrative.

$

-

Operational savings with reduced potable water demand.

$ -

1

Credit 3.1 Water Use Reduction, 20% Reduction

1 See note for WEc2.

$

-Operational savings with reduced potable water demand.

$ -

1



$

-Operational savings with reduced potable water demand.

$ -

Y

Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

Required There is no added cost to the project as SWPPP's are required of all projects.

$

-

Not applicable

$

1

Credit 1

Site Selection

1

This credit is no additional cost. Per credit requirements, the site qualifies for this credit.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 2 Development Density & Community Connectivity

1 Verify current services, based on preliminary data, site qualifies for this credit.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1 $ - $ -1 Credit 4.1 Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access 1 No added cost. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 4.2

Alternative Transportation, Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms

1

Cost is minimal and varies dependent upon number of racks and showers. Final FTE numbers shall be determined by DB team

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 4.3

Alternative Transportation, Low-EEmmiittttiinngg and FFuueell--Efficient VVeehhiicclleess

1

Assume 1,720 stalls total, 5% of which would be striped for preferred parking (86 stalls). OR EV Charging Stations for Option 3 @ 26 multi port stations total.

500 to 66000

Varies if Option 2 or Option 3 is selected. Option 3 will have a payback period as the team MUST also account for charging users for EV charging (approx. 2 cents per kwh).

$3500 to $6000 for OPTION 3 EV

CHARGING STATIONS

Credit 4.4

Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacity

1

Site does not meet requirements.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 5.1

Site Development, Protect or Restore Habitat

1

Depends upon strategy selected.

$

-

Green roofing will have a payback period as it reduces energy demand / consumption

$ -

1 Credit 5.2 Site Development, Maximize Open Space

1

Depends upon planting selected. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design, Quantity Control

1

Cost varies dependent upon strategy. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 6.2

Stormwater Design, Quality Control

1

Cost varies dependent upon strategy, however simple infiltration should be minimal in cost.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 7.1

Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof

1

As a parking structure is part of the program, there is no added cost above and beyond the parking structure.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 7.2

Heat Island Effect, Roof

1

Varies dependent upon type of roofing selected.

$

-


Varies dependent upon level of heat reduction via chosen strategy - there is a payback associated with reduction of energy consumption.

1

Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction

1 Cost savings may be realized through reduced fixture count.

$

-

Cost savings may be realized through reduced fixture count.

$ -


Yes ?

1

Credit 4.1

Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives & Sealants

1

Costs vary, in general minimal to nothing with careful specification.

$

-

No Payback timeline. Benefits include improved air quality for occupants.

$ -

1

Credit 4.2

Low-Emitting Materials, Paints & Coatings

1


$

-


$ -

1

Credit 4.3

Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems

1


$

-


$ -

1

Credit 4.4

Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood & Agrifiber Products

1


$

-


$ -

1

Credit 5 Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control

1

On average cost is minimal, $1000 per installed entry way.

$

3,000

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 6.1

Controllability of Systems, Lighting

1

On average cost is around $.050 per SF. Thus overall cost is dependent upon different factors such as applicable SF.

$

50,000

Savings on operations for reduced lighting demand.

$ 1,500

Credit 6.2 Controllability of Systems, Thermal Comfort 1

1

Credit 7.1 Thermal Comfort, Design

1

Cost depends upon approach, please see narrative.

$

- Savings on operations for

reduced energy demand. Depends upon approach and energy saved

1

Credit 7..2

Thermal Comfort, Verification

1

Minimal cost, reflected in soft cost to distribute and collect anonymous surveys.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 8.1 Daylight & Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces 1 Cost can vary widely, please

see narrative. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 8.2 Daylight & Views, Views for 90% of Spaces 1 Cost can vary widely, please


Yes ?

Yes ?

Yes ?

Certified 26-32 points Silver 33-38 points Gold 39-51 points Platinum 52-69 points

46 13 Project Totals (pre-certification estimates) 69 Points

LEED SCORECARD: GOLD SCENARIO ‘A’

5

3

Materials & Resources

13 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Y

Prereq 1

Storage & Collection of Recyclables

Required

This credit requires no added cost as the college and district policy already ccaallllss for recycling.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

Credit 1.1 Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 1 $ - $ -Credit 1.2 Building Reuse, Maintain 95% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 1 $ - $ -Credit 1.3 Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 1 $ - $ -

1

Credit 2.1

Construction Waste Management, Divert 50% from Disposal

1 Contractors must divert at least 50% of C&D waste as per General Conditions.

$

- There will be cost savings with reduced landfill tipping fees.

$ -

1

Credit 2.2


1

As requirements call for at least 50% diversion, attaining another 25% diversion will not require added cost.

$

-

There will be cost savings with reduced landfill tipping fees.

$ -

Credit 3.1 Materials Reuse, 5% 1

Credit 3.2 Materials Reuse,10% 1

1

Credit 4.1 Recycled Content, 10% (post-consumer + ½ pre-consumer)

1 Generally no added cost with careful specification of materials.

$

- Not applicable

$ -

1


1 Generally no added cost with careful specification of materials..

$

- Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 5.1

Regional Materials, 10% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regionally

1 Cost varies dependent upon strategy and materials selected to meet criteria.

$

- Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 5.2



$

- Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials 1 See narrative. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 7

Certified Wood

1

Costs vary widely dependent upon wood species.

$

- Not applicable

5

Innovation & Design Process

5 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


1

Credit 1.1

Innovation in Design: Green Cleaning Program

1 There is no added cost for this credit aass iitt iiss rreefflleecctteedd in operations.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 1.2

Innovation in Design: Kiosk and Signage Green Education Program

1

There is minimal added cost for this credit. LACCD provides all video content for the kiosk by utilizing E7 studios.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 1.3

Innovation in Design: Exemplary performance

1

This credit is open but generally attainable for at least one credit to receive exemplary performance..

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 1.4 Innovation in Design: Project specific 1 This credit is open. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 2 LEED® Accredited Professional

1 There is no added cost for

this credit. $ - Not applicable $ -

12

1

Indoor Environmental Quality

15 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Y

Prereq 1

Minimum IAQ Performance

Required

There is no added cost for this credit, ventilation rates needs to be specified aanndd designed to increase ventilation.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

Y Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Required No added cost. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 1

Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring

1

There is a cost increase for this credit for CO2 sensors and increased Building Automation Systems tie in, see narrative.

$

-


$ -

Credit 2 Increased Ventilation 1

1

Credit 3.1

Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction

1

See narrative.

$

-


$ -

1

Credit 3.2

Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy

1

There is minimal cost for this credit. Generally associated with increased man hours from the contractor to flush out VOC's and contaminates prior to building occupancy via the use of fresh air.

$

-


$ -


LEED-NC Version 2.2 Project Checklist

2525 Firestone Blvd, City of Southgate, CA

East LA College - Satellite Campus Project "South Gate Educational

Center" LEED Platinum Scenario "B" Yes ? No

Yes ? No

12

2

Sustainable Sites

14 Points

COST ANALYSIS

AVERAGE COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Yes ? No

14

3

Energy & Atmosphere

17 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Y

Prereq 1

Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems

Required


$

-

$ -

Y

Prereq 2

Minimum Energy Performance

Required

No added cost as project must attain minimum energy performance.

$

-

Payback period is difficult to define as this credit relates to multiple systemsand energy efficiency measures.

$ -

Y

Prereq 3

Fundamental Refrigerant Management

Required There is no cost impact by utilizing refrigerants that meet this requirement.

$

- Not applicable, no added

cost.

$ -

8

2

Credit 1

Optimize Energy Performance

1 to 10

Cost varies widely dependent upon strategies chosen to achieve energy savings.

$

-


$ -

3

Credit 2.1

On-Site Renewable Energy

1 to 3

Cost varies widely dependent upon method and means chosen for renewable energy source

$

-


$ -

1

Credit 3

Enhanced Commissioning

1


$

-

There will be operational savings for systems running at peak calibrations.

$ -

1

Credit 4

Enhanced Refrigerant Management

1

No added cost.

$

-There will be operational savings for systems with increased life spans.

$ -

1

Credit 5

Measurement & Verification

1

Costs range from $10,000 to $20,000, see narrative.

$

15,000Operational savings related to energy systems performing properly.

$ -

1 Credit 6 Green Power

1

In general the cost is minimal, see narrative. $ - Not applicable $ -

LEED SCORECARD: PLATINUM SCENARIO ‘B’

5

Water Efficiency

5 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


1

Credit 1.1 Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50%

1

There is no added cost with careful selection of plant species.

$

-Reduced operational cost with reduced potable water demand

$ -

1

Credit 1.2

Water Efficient Landscaping, No Potable Use or No Irrigation

1

Initial cost varies, however careful selection of plant species and no irrigation system infrastructure has cost savings associated.

$

Savings related to no irrigation system infrastructure

$ -

1

Credit 2

Innovative Wastewater Technologies

1

There is no added cost as the Board mandates the use of waterless urinals, for a complimentary strategy cost can vary widely. Please see narrative.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1



$

- Not applicable

$ -

1



$

-Operational savings related to reduced potable water demand

$ -

Y

Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

Required There is no added cost to the project as SWPPP's are required of all projects.

$

-

Not applicable

$

1 Credit 1

Site Selection

1

This credit is no additional cost. Per credit requirements, the site qualifies for this credit

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 2 Development Density & Community Connectivity

1 Verify current services; based on preliminary data, site qualifies for this credit.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1 $ - $ -1 Credit 4.1 Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access 1 No added cost. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 4.2

Alternative Transportation, Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms

1

Cost is minimal and varies dependent upon number of racks and showers. Final FTE numbers sshall be determined by DB team.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 4.3

Alternative Transportation, Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles

1

Assume 1,720 stalls total, 5% of which would be striped for preferred parking (86 stalls). OR EV Charging Stations for Option 3 @ 26 multi port stations total.

500 to 6000

Varies if Option 2 or Option 3 is selected. Option 3 will have a payback period as the team MUST also account for charging users for EV charging (approx. 2 cents per kwh)..

$3500 to $6000 for OPTION 3 EV

CHARGING STATIONS

1 Credit 4.4 Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacity 1 Does not qualify. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 5.1

Site Development, Protect or Restore Habitat

1

Depends upon strategy selected.

$

-

Green roofing will have a payback period as it reduces energy demand / consumption

$ -

1 Credit 5.2 Site Development, Maximize Open Space

1

Depends upon planting strategy selected. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design, Quantity Control

1 Cost varies dependent upon

strategy. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 6.2

Stormwater Design, Quality Control

1

Cost varies dependent upon strategy, however simple infiltration should be minimal in cost.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 7.1

Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof

1

As a parking structure is part of the program, there is no added cost above and beyond parking structure.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 7.2

Heat Island Effect, Roof

1


$

-


Varies dependent upon level of heat reduction via chosen strategy - there is a payback associated withreduction of energy consumption.

1

Credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction

1 Cost savings may be realized through reduced fixture count.

$

-

Cost savings may be realized through reduced fixture count.

$ -


Yes ? No

8

5

Materials & Resources

13 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Y

Prereq 1

Storage & Collection of Recyclables

Required

This credit requires no added cost as the college and district policy already calls for recycling.

$

-

Not applicable, no added cost.

$ -

1 Credit 1.1 Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 1 $ - $ -1 Credit 1.2 Building Reuse, Maintain 95% of Existing Walls, Floors & Roof 1 $ - $ -1 Credit 1.3 Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 1 $ - $ -

1

Credit 2.1 Construction Waste Management, Divert 50% from Disposal

1 Contractors must divert at least 50% of C&D waste as per General Conditions.

$


$ -

1

Credit 2.2


1

As requirements call for at least 50% diversion, attaining another 25% diversion will not require added cost.

$


$ -

1 Credit 3.1 Materials Reuse, 5% 1

1 Credit 3.2 Materials Reuse,10% 1

1



$

- Not applicable

$ -

1



$

- Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 5.1



$

- Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 5.2



$

- Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials 1 See narrative. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 7 Certified Wood

1

Costs vary widely dependent upon wood species. $ - Not applicable $ -

Yes ? No

Yes ? No

5

Innovation & Design Process

5 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


1

Credit 1.1

Innovation in Design: Green Cleaning Program

1 There is no added cost for this credit as it is reflected in operations.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 1.2

Innovation in Design: Kiosk and Signage Green Education Program

1

There is minimal added cost for this credit. LACCD provides all video content for the kiosk by utilizing E7 studios.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 1.3 Innovation in Design: Exemplary ppeerrffoorrmmaannccee Green Powe

1

Added cost for this, see notes on EAc6. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 1.4 Innovation in Design: Exemplary performance or project specific 1 This credit is open. $ - Not applicable $ -

1 Credit 2 LEED® Accredited Professional

1

There is no added cost for this credit. $ - Not applicable $ -

Certified 26-32 points Silver 33-38 points Gold 39-51 points Platinum 52-69 points

58 4 7

Yes ? No

Project Totals (pre-certification estimates) 69 Points

LEED SCORECARD: PLATINUM SCENARIO ‘B’

1

Credit 4.1

Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives & Sealants

1 Costs vary, in general minimal to nothing with careful specification.

$

-No Payback timeline. Benefits include improved air quality for occupants.

$ -

1

Credit 4.2

Low-Emitting Materials, Paints & Coatings


$


$ -

1

Credit 4.3

Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems


$


$ -

1

Credit 4.4

Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood & Agrifiber Products


$


$ -

1

Credit 5 Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control

1

On average cost is minimal, $1000 per installed entry way.

$

3,000

Not applicable

$ -

1

Credit 6.1

Controllability of Systems, Lighting

1

On average cost is around $.050 per SF. Thus overall cost is dependent upon different factors such as applicable SF.

$

50,000

Savings on operations for reduced lighting demand.

$ 1,500

1

Credit 6.2

Controllability of Systems, Thermal Comfort

1

On average cost is around $2.00 per SF. Thus overall cost is dependent upon different factors such as applicable SF.

$

200,000

Savings on operations for reduced energy demand.

$ 5,000

1

Credit 7.1 Thermal Comfort, Design

1

Cost depends upon approach, please see narrative.

$

- Savings on operations for

reduced energy demand. Depends upon approach and energy saved

1

Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort, Verification

1

Minimal cost, reflected in soft cost to distribute and collect anonymous surveys.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

1 Credit 8.1 Daylight & Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces 1 Cost can vary widely, please


1 Credit 8.2 Daylight & Views, Views for 90% of Spaces 1 Cost can vary widely, please


14

1

Indoor Environmental Quality

15 Points

COST ANALYSIS

COST

PAYBACK PERIOD


Y

Prereq 1

Minimum IAQ Performance

Required

There is no added cost for this credit, ventilation rates needs to be specified and designed to increase ventilation.

$

-

Not applicable

$ -

Y Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control Required No added cost. $ - Not applicable $ -

1

Credit 1

Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring

1

There is a cost increase for this credit for CO2 sensors and increased Building Automation Systems tie in, see narrative.

$

-


$ -

1

Credit 2

Increased Ventilation

1

Cost is minimal, see narrative.

$

-


$ -

1

Credit 3.1

Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction

1

See narrative.

$

-


$ -

1

Credit 3.2

Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy

1

There is minimal cost for this credit. Generally associated with increased man hours from the contractor to flush out VOC's and contaminates prior to building occupancy via the use of fresh air.

$

-


$ -

Documents

EAST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE SOUTH GATE EDUCATIONAL …€¦ · east los angeles college south gate educational center master plan 2015 april 16, 2013